↓ Skip to main content

Incorporating periodic variability in hidden Markov models for animal movement

Overview of attention for article published in Movement Ecology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Incorporating periodic variability in hidden Markov models for animal movement
Published in
Movement Ecology, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40462-016-0093-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Li, Benjamin M. Bolker

Abstract

Clustering time-series data into discrete groups can improve prediction and provide insight into the nature of underlying, unobservable states of the system. However, temporal variation in probabilities of group occupancy, or the rates at which individuals move between groups, can obscure such signals. We use finite mixture and hidden Markov models (HMMs), two standard clustering techniques, to model long-term hourly movement data from Florida panthers (Puma concolor coryi). Allowing for temporal heterogeneity in transition probabilities, a straightforward but little-used extension of the standard HMM framework, resolves some shortcomings of current models and clarifies the movement patterns of panthers. Simulations and analyses of panther data showed that model misspecification (omitting important sources of variation) can lead to overfitting/overestimating the underlying number of movement states. Models incorporating temporal heterogeneity identify fewer underlying states, and can make out-of-sample predictions that capture observed diurnal and autocorrelated movement patterns exhibited by Florida panthers. Incorporating temporal heterogeneity improved goodness of fit and predictive capability as well as reducing the selected number of movement states closer to a biologically interpretable level, although there is further room for improvement here. Our results suggest that incorporating additional structure in statistical models of movement can allow more accurate assessment of appropriate model complexity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 94 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 24%
Researcher 22 23%
Student > Master 15 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 17 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 41 42%
Environmental Science 12 12%
Engineering 6 6%
Computer Science 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 23 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 January 2017.
All research outputs
#15,440,760
of 22,950,943 outputs
Outputs from Movement Ecology
#267
of 316 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,918
of 418,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Movement Ecology
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,950,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 316 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.3. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 418,939 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.