ArticleJournal of mathematical biology2016
Robustness of movement models: can models bridge the gap between temporal scales of data sets and behavioural processes?
Article in Journal of mathematical biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three-Dimensional Correlated Random Walks for Animal Movement and Habitat Selection.Ecology letters · 2026Article
- The 4th Dimension in Animal Movement: The Effect of Temporal Resolution and Landscape Configuration in Habitat-Selection Analyses.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- An introduction to statistical models used to characterize species-habitat associations with animal movement data.Movement ecology · 2025Review
- A random walk model that accounts for space occupation and movements of a large herbivore.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Reptiles on the wrong track? Moving beyond traditional estimators with dynamic Brownian Bridge Movement Models.Movement ecology · 2020Article
- Territory surveillance and prey management: Wolves keep track of space and time.Ecology and evolution · 2017Article
- A framework for analyzing the robustness of movement models to variable step discretization.Journal of mathematical biology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Discrete-time random walks and their extensions are common tools for analyzing animal movement data. In these analyses, resolution of temporal discretization is a critical feature. Ideally, a model both mirrors the relevant temporal scale of the biological process of interest and matches the data sampling rate. Challenges arise when resolution of data is too coarse due to technological constraints, or when we wish to extrapolate results or compare results obtained from data with different resolutions. Drawing loosely on the concept of robustness in statistics, we propose a rigorous mathematical framework for studying movement models' robustness against changes in temporal resolution. In this framework, we define varying levels of robustness as formal model properties, focusing on random walk models with spatially-explicit component. With the new framework, we can investigate whether models can validly be applied to data across varying temporal resolutions and how we can account for these different resolutions in statistical inference results. We apply the new framework to movement-based resource selection models, demonstrating both analytical and numerical calculations, as well as a Monte Carlo simulation approach. While exact robustness is rare, the concept of approximate robustness provides a promising new direction for analyzing movement models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27098937What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.