Abstract:Wildlife surveys often seek to determine the presence or absence of species at sites. Such data may be used in population monitoring, impact assessment, and species– habitat analyses. An implicit assumption of presence/absence surveys is that if a species is not detected in one or more visits to a site, it is absent from that site. However, it is rarely if ever possible to be completely sure that a species is absent, and false negative observation errors may arise when detection probabilities are less than 1. The detectability of species in wildlife surveys is one of the most important sources of uncertainty in determining the proportion of a landscape that is occupied by a species. Recent studies emphasize the need to acknowledge and incorporate false negative observation error rates in the analysis of site occupancy data, although a comparative study of the range of available methods for estimating detectability and occupancy is notably absent. The motivation for this study stems from the lack of guidance in the literature about the relative merits of alternative methods for estimating detection probabilities and site occupancy proportions from presence/absence survey data. Six approaches to estimating underlying detection probabilities and the proportion of sites occupied from binary observation data are reviewed. These include three parametric methods based on binomial mixtures, one nonparametric approach based on mark–recapture theory, and two approaches based on simplistic assumptions about occupancy rates. We compare the performance of each method using simulated data for which the “true” underlying detection rate is known. Simulated data were realized from a beta‐binomial distribution, incorporating a realistic level of variation in detection rates. Estimation methods varied in their precision and bias. The “binomial‐with‐added‐zeros” mixture model, estimated by maximum likelihood, was the least biased estimator of detection probability and, therefore, occupancy rate. We provide an Excel spreadsheet to execute all of the methods reviewed. Stand‐alone programs such as PRESENCE may be used to estimate all models including the “binomial with added zeros” model. Our findings lend support to the use of maximum likelihood methods in estimating site occupancy and detectability rates.

A modified importance sampling scheme for the estimation of detection system performance

On the theory of importance sampling applied to the analysis of detection systems

Improving Importance Sampling Method in Structural Reliability

A Novel Adaptive Importance Sampling Algorithm for Bayesian Model Updating

A Numerical Method Of Array Sensor Noise Response In Detection Performance Optimization

A WEIGHT-BOUNDED IMPORTANCE SAMPLING METHOD FOR VARIANCE REDUCTION

Application of Important Direction Sampling in Simulation Low Detection Efficiency Problems

A New Reliability Method Combining Adaptive Kriging and Active Variance Reduction Using Multiple Importance Sampling

RELIABILITY SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS METHOD BASED ON IMPORTANCE SAMPLING

An Importance Sampling Method with Applications to Rare Event Probability

Improved adaptive importance sampling algorithm

A review of Importance Sampling research

PRECISION AND BIAS OF METHODS FOR ESTIMATING POINT SURVEY DETECTION PROBABILITIES

Failure Probability Estimation for Black-Box Autonomous Systems using State-Dependent Importance Sampling Proposals

A review and assessment of importance sampling methods for reliability analysis

Adaptive Importance Sampling for Efficient Stochastic Root Finding and Quantile Estimation

Efficient Importance Sampling for Rare Event Simulation with Applications

Nonasymptotic Bounds for Suboptimal Importance Sampling

A simulation-based estimation method for bias reduction

Penalized Importance Sampling for Parameter Estimation in Stochastic Differential Equations