Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70209182

Is your ad hoc model selection strategy affecting your multimodel inference?

Abstract

(Yackulic) 1. Ecologists routinely fit complex models with multiple parameters of interest, where hundreds or more competing models are plausible. To limit the number of fitted models, ecologists often define a model selection strategy composed of a series of stages in which certain features of a model are compared while other features are held constant. Defining these multi-stage strategies requires making a series of decisions, which may potentially impact inferences, but have not been critically evaluated. 2. We begin by identifying key features of strategies, introducing descriptive terms when they did not already exist in the literature. Strategies differ in how they define and order model building stages. Sequential-by-sub-model strategies focus on one sub-model (parameter) at a time with modeling of subsequent sub-models dependent on the selected model structures from the previous stages. Secondary candidate set strategies model sub-models independently and combine the top set of models from each sub-model for selection in a final stage. Build-up approaches define stages across sub-models and increase in complexity at each stage. Strategies also differ in how the top set of models is selected in each stage and whether they use null or more complex model structures for non-target sub-models. 3. We tested the performance of different model selection strategies using four datasets and three model types. For each dataset, we determined the “true” distribution of AIC weights by fitting all plausible models. Then, we calculated the number of models that would have been fitted and the portion of “true” AIC weight we recovered under different model selection strategies. 4. Sequential-by-sub-model strategies often performed poorly. Build-up or secondary candidate sets were more reliable, provided all models within 5 AIC of the top model were carried forward to subsequent stages. The structure of non-target sub-models was less important. 5. Multi-stage approaches cannot compensate for a lack of critical thought in selecting covariates and building models to represent competing a priori hypotheses. However, even when competing hypotheses for different sub-models are limited, thousands or more models may be possible so strategies to explore candidate model space reliably and efficiently will be necessary.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Dana J. Morin, Charles B. Yackulic, James E. Diffendorfer, Damon B. Lesmeister, Clayton Nielsen, Janice Reid, Eric M. Schauber. 2020-01-16. Is your ad hoc model selection strategy affecting your multimodel inference?. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2997

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Evaluating harvest liberalization strategies on population dynamics of southern latitude temperate-breeding Canada geese

The recovery of the Canada goose ( Branta canadensis ) is one of North America's greatest conservation success stories. Today, continental abundance of temperate-breeding Canada geese (those breeding in southern Canada and lower 48 states in the United States) greatly exceeds historical levels. As a result of increased abundance, human–goose conflicts have also increased, ranging from private and agricultural property damage to human health concerns. Managers have primarily attempted to lower Canada goose populations using hunter harvest via liberalized hunting regulations (increased bag limits and total hunting days). To evaluate the effectiveness of harvest strategies for temperate-breeding Canada geese, managers need a better understanding of how liberalized hunting regulations affect population dynamics. We estimated survival and harvest probabilities, abundance, and recovery distribution of temperate-breeding Canada geese banded in Arkansas, USA, during 2005–2020. We found that adult harvest probabilities declined overall during the study and adult survival probabilities increased. Annual abundances of juvenile geese (≤1 year old) declined during the study, whereas there was no detectable trend in abundance of the adult population over time. Most Canada geese breeding in Arkansas were shot in Arkansas, indicating potential for population dynamics to be influenced largely by state-specific harvest regulations. However, our results suggest that harvest liberalization as a management tool may have limited capacity to further influence population dynamics of Canada geese. Declines in productivity and recruitment likely had a greater influence on the similar observed declines in juvenile and adult abundances, respectively, during our study. More research is needed to better understand the ecological mechanism affecting the population dynamics of Canada geese in both urban and rural environments.

Arkansas

Predicted habitat use for reintroduced grizzly bears in the transboundary North Cascades ecosystem

Grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ) were once numerous in the North Cascades transboundary region of Washington State (United States) and British Columbia (Canada); however, few remain today. To support ongoing reintroduction evaluations, we used simulations based on movement models developed in the Northern Rocky Mountains to predict habitat use by a small founding group of grizzly bears in the North Cascades during the early stages of reintroduction. These simulations represent movements across a spatially explicit landscape based on individual-specific selection and movement parameters. We first evaluated predictive performance in three nearby populations of grizzly bears in the Squamish-Lillooet, McGillvary Mountains, and North Stein-Nahatlatch regions of the Coast Mountains, British Columbia. After applying an elevation-based calibration, predicted habitat use showed strong agreement with GPS location data from 73 collared bears. Across population–sex subgroups, Spearman rank correlations were ≥0.95, with 69.2%–83.3% of locations occurring within the top five habitat classes (covering 50% of mapped habitat) and 17.1%–36.2% in the top class (representing 10%). Overall, 24.5% and 77.9% of locations fell within the top class and top five classes, respectively. Seasonal validation showed strongest predictive performance from May to late summer or fall. Model predictions for the North Cascades indicate that habitat use during early reintroduction is likely to be concentrated in the central and northern mountainous portions of the ecosystem along the US–Canada border. These maps can guide recovery planning when no local bear data are yet available in the North Cascades transboundary region.

British Columbia, Washington

Holistic understanding of uncertainty for collaborative and proactive global change decision making

Global change is accelerating and pushing the planet's ecosystems beyond the range of historical observations, creating increasing uncertainty in future system conditions. Despite general agreement that proactive environmental action is warranted, environmental decision conversations often end by identifying additional data needed to reduce uncertainty before taking novel action. Given the inherent uncertainty in complex issues such as global change, quantitative data alone are likely insufficient to support proactive environmental action. Holistic understanding of uncertainty includes scientific quantification of uncertainty paired with emotional responses and transcendental grounding to help people work together toward proactive action in uncertain decision contexts. Holistic understanding arises from the four ways in which humans perceive the world, termed the Four Realms: Physical (e.g., how I observe), Mental (e.g., how I think), Emotional (e.g., how I feel), and Transcendental (e.g., how I connect to greater meaning or purpose). Environmental scientists and decision makers are generally trained in Physical and Mental Realm observation and analysis, but not in how to apply Emotional and Transcendental Realm understanding. Emotional and Transcendental processing occurs in scientists and decision makers whether it is acknowledged or not and contributes to different people interpreting the same information in different ways. Thus, when the role of Emotional and Transcendental Realms in an individual's interpretation process is not understood, it can derail conversations and perpetuate the status quo. Explicitly recognizing all Four Realms can bring people together across differences and inspire shared, novel decision making even in increasing uncertainty. To illustrate the benefits of holistic understanding, we share stories from our experiences in environmental decision contexts. Because accessing the Four Realms requires experiential and embodied techniques, while still relying on core scientific tenets of observation and analysis, we also present techniques for readers to learn to feel their own emotional understanding and connect to their own transcendental understanding. Holistic understanding can enhance data-driven decisions by recognizing that human responses to uncertainty inherently include interactions between emotions, thoughts, transcendental connections, and behavior. Ultimately, holistic understanding can help anchor data-driven decisions in intra- and interpersonal connections, inspiring action in the face of uncertainty.

Ecosphere