Matthew H. Holden, Morenikeji D. Akinlotan, Allison D. Binley, Frankie H. T. Cho, Kate J. Helmstedt, Iadine Chadès
{"title":"为什么我不应该收集更多数据?协调直觉与信息价值分析之间的分歧","authors":"Matthew H. Holden, Morenikeji D. Akinlotan, Allison D. Binley, Frankie H. T. Cho, Kate J. Helmstedt, Iadine Chadès","doi":"10.1111/2041-210X.14391","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>\n \n </p>","PeriodicalId":208,"journal":{"name":"Methods in Ecology and Evolution","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/2041-210X.14391","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why shouldn't I collect more data? Reconciling disagreements between intuition and value of information analyses\",\"authors\":\"Matthew H. Holden, Morenikeji D. Akinlotan, Allison D. Binley, Frankie H. T. Cho, Kate J. Helmstedt, Iadine Chadès\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/2041-210X.14391\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>\\n \\n </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":208,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Methods in Ecology and Evolution\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/2041-210X.14391\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Methods in Ecology and Evolution\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/2041-210X.14391\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Methods in Ecology and Evolution","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/2041-210X.14391","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
信息价值(VoI)分析是一种量化额外信息如何改善管理决策的方法,其应用范围从自然保护到渔业。然而,VoI 研究经常表明,收集更多数据并不会显著改善管理结果。这往往与生态学家和管理者的直觉相矛盾,他们通常认为新信息对管理至关重要。认为 VoI 是黑箱方法的看法加剧了这种不一致。对 VoI 通常低于生态学家预期的原因缺乏了解,这阻碍了实地应用。目前迫切需要确定促使 VoI 方法产生低值的因素。在此,我们采用严谨的方法来深入探讨 VoI 值通常较低的原因。我们首先推导出一个具有两个不确定状态、两个行动和四个管理结果的 VoI 问题的分析解决方案和上限。我们展示了 VoI 如何随在每种状态下实施行动的收益(即效用)以及系统处于每种状态的概率而变化。我们将我们的公式应用于一个已发表的青蛙种群管理案例研究,并将结果扩展到 1000 万个随机生成的大型问题。在我们的双行动双状态模拟中,有一半的时间 VoI 为零,这相当于在所有状态下有一个行动是最佳或等同最佳的。即使 VoI 值为正,通常也很低。然而,平均而言,VoI 会随着状态和行动数量的增加而增加。在 VoI 为正值的情况下,我们的 VoI 分析表达式表明,VoI 的特征是状态概率和效用差距,即在每个状态下部署每个行动的效用差异。我们推导出的边界表明,在所有双行动双状态系统中,VoI 不可能大于最大效用差距的一半。我们的分析简单而有力,为我们提供了对驱动 VoI 分析的重要因素的宝贵见解。我们的工作为在更复杂的环境中提高 VoI 分析的可解释性提供了重要的垫脚石,最终使管理者能够利用 VoI 帮助他们做出明智的决策。
期刊介绍:
A British Ecological Society journal, Methods in Ecology and Evolution (MEE) promotes the development of new methods in ecology and evolution, and facilitates their dissemination and uptake by the research community. MEE brings together papers from previously disparate sub-disciplines to provide a single forum for tracking methodological developments in all areas.
MEE publishes methodological papers in any area of ecology and evolution, including:
-Phylogenetic analysis
-Statistical methods
-Conservation & management
-Theoretical methods
-Practical methods, including lab and field
-This list is not exhaustive, and we welcome enquiries about possible submissions. Methods are defined in the widest terms and may be analytical, practical or conceptual.
A primary aim of the journal is to maximise the uptake of techniques by the community. We recognise that a major stumbling block in the uptake and application of new methods is the accessibility of methods. For example, users may need computer code, example applications or demonstrations of methods.