模拟测试渔获量数据漏报时集合模型的性能

IF 3.1 2区 农林科学 Q1 FISHERIES ICES Journal of Marine Science Pub Date : 2024-05-28 DOI:10.1093/icesjms/fsae067
Elizabeth N Brooks, Jon K T Brodziak
{"title":"模拟测试渔获量数据漏报时集合模型的性能","authors":"Elizabeth N Brooks, Jon K T Brodziak","doi":"10.1093/icesjms/fsae067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ensemble model use in stock assessment is increasing, yet guidance on construction and an evaluation of performance relative to single models is lacking. Ensemble models can characterize structural uncertainty and avoid the conundrum of selecting a “best” assessment model when alternative models explain observed data equally well. Through simulation, we explore the importance of identifying candidate models for both assessment and short-term forecasts and the consequences of different ensemble weighting methods on estimated quantities. Ensemble performance exceeded a single best model only when the set of candidate models spanned the true model configuration. Accuracy and precision depended on the model weighting scheme, and varied between two case studies investigating the impact of catch accuracy. Information theoretic weighting methods performed well in the case study with accurate catch, while equal weighting performed best when catch was underreported. In both cases, equal weighting produced multimodality. Ensuring that an ensemble spans the true state of nature will be challenging, but we observed that a change in sign of Mohn’s rho across candidate models coincided with the true OM being bounded. Further development of protocols to select an objective and balanced set of candidate models, and diagnostics to assess adequacy of candidates are recommended.","PeriodicalId":51072,"journal":{"name":"ICES Journal of Marine Science","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Simulation testing performance of ensemble models when catch data are underreported\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth N Brooks, Jon K T Brodziak\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/icesjms/fsae067\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Ensemble model use in stock assessment is increasing, yet guidance on construction and an evaluation of performance relative to single models is lacking. Ensemble models can characterize structural uncertainty and avoid the conundrum of selecting a “best” assessment model when alternative models explain observed data equally well. Through simulation, we explore the importance of identifying candidate models for both assessment and short-term forecasts and the consequences of different ensemble weighting methods on estimated quantities. Ensemble performance exceeded a single best model only when the set of candidate models spanned the true model configuration. Accuracy and precision depended on the model weighting scheme, and varied between two case studies investigating the impact of catch accuracy. Information theoretic weighting methods performed well in the case study with accurate catch, while equal weighting performed best when catch was underreported. In both cases, equal weighting produced multimodality. Ensuring that an ensemble spans the true state of nature will be challenging, but we observed that a change in sign of Mohn’s rho across candidate models coincided with the true OM being bounded. Further development of protocols to select an objective and balanced set of candidate models, and diagnostics to assess adequacy of candidates are recommended.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ICES Journal of Marine Science\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ICES Journal of Marine Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsae067\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FISHERIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ICES Journal of Marine Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsae067","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FISHERIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在种群评估中使用集合模式的情况越来越多,但缺乏有关构建的指导,也缺乏相对于单一模式的性能评估。集合模型可以描述结构的不确定性,避免在其他模型同样能解释观测数据的情况下选择 "最佳 "评估模型的难题。通过模拟,我们探讨了为评估和短期预测确定候选模型的重要性,以及不同的集合加权方法对估计量的影响。只有当候选模型集跨越真实模型配置时,集合性能才会超过单一最佳模型。准确度和精确度取决于模型加权方案,并且在调查捕获精度影响的两个案例研究中各不相同。信息理论加权法在渔获量准确的案例研究中表现良好,而等权法在渔获量报告不足的情况下表现最佳。在这两种情况下,等权重都能产生多模态。确保集合跨越真实的自然状态将是一项挑战,但我们观察到,候选模型中莫恩 rho 的符号变化与真实 OM 的边界相吻合。我们建议进一步制定方案,以选择一组客观、平衡的候选模型,并制定诊断方法来评估候选模型的适当性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Simulation testing performance of ensemble models when catch data are underreported
Ensemble model use in stock assessment is increasing, yet guidance on construction and an evaluation of performance relative to single models is lacking. Ensemble models can characterize structural uncertainty and avoid the conundrum of selecting a “best” assessment model when alternative models explain observed data equally well. Through simulation, we explore the importance of identifying candidate models for both assessment and short-term forecasts and the consequences of different ensemble weighting methods on estimated quantities. Ensemble performance exceeded a single best model only when the set of candidate models spanned the true model configuration. Accuracy and precision depended on the model weighting scheme, and varied between two case studies investigating the impact of catch accuracy. Information theoretic weighting methods performed well in the case study with accurate catch, while equal weighting performed best when catch was underreported. In both cases, equal weighting produced multimodality. Ensuring that an ensemble spans the true state of nature will be challenging, but we observed that a change in sign of Mohn’s rho across candidate models coincided with the true OM being bounded. Further development of protocols to select an objective and balanced set of candidate models, and diagnostics to assess adequacy of candidates are recommended.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ICES Journal of Marine Science
ICES Journal of Marine Science 农林科学-海洋学
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
12.10%
发文量
207
审稿时长
6-16 weeks
期刊介绍: The ICES Journal of Marine Science publishes original articles, opinion essays (“Food for Thought”), visions for the future (“Quo Vadimus”), and critical reviews that contribute to our scientific understanding of marine systems and the impact of human activities on them. The Journal also serves as a foundation for scientific advice across the broad spectrum of management and conservation issues related to the marine environment. Oceanography (e.g. productivity-determining processes), marine habitats, living resources, and related topics constitute the key elements of papers considered for publication. This includes economic, social, and public administration studies to the extent that they are directly related to management of the seas and are of general interest to marine scientists. Integrated studies that bridge gaps between traditional disciplines are particularly welcome.
期刊最新文献
Adaptive small-scale fisheries in the eastern Cantabrian coast through reliance on essential species A roadmap for generating annual bycatch estimates from sparse at-sea observer data Assessing the value of harmful algal bloom forecasts in the Pacific Northwest Uncrewed surface vehicles (USVs) as platforms for fisheries and plankton acoustics Trophic flows to mesozooplankton support the conventional paradigm of pelagic food web structure in ocean ecosystems
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1