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.

Estimating probability terms for the background presence of glass when considering activity in forensic casework

A Note on the Specific Source Identification Problem in Forensic Science in the Presence of Uncertainty about the Background Population

A Bayesian approach for the analysis of error rate studies in forensic science

Defence Against the Modern Arts: the Curse of Statistics "Score-based likelihood ratios"

Psychometric analysis of forensic examiner behavior

Modeling the Probability Distribution of Positional Errors Incurred by Residential Address Geocoding.

Confirmative laboratory tests and one example of forensic application of the probabilistic approach to the area of convergence in BPA

Implementing statistical learning methods through Bayesian networks. Part 1: a guide to Bayesian parameter estimation using forensic science data

PRECISION AND BIAS OF METHODS FOR ESTIMATING POINT SURVEY DETECTION PROBABILITIES

Error Function Attack of chaos synchronization based encryption schemes

Subtleties in Bayesian decision-theoretic analysis for forensic findings: Notes on recent discussion of the role of validation study data in rational decision making

Bloodstain pattern analysis & Bayes: A case report

Quantifying the strength of firearms comparisons based on error rate studies

Flexible regression models for estimating postmortem interval (PMI) in forensic medicine

Improved two-point correlation function estimates using glass-like distributions as a reference sample

To test or not to test? A question of rational decision making in forensic biology

Modelling spatially autocorrelated detection probabilities in spatial capture-recapture using random effects

Sensitivity of inferences in forensic genetics to assumptions about founding genes

Using Bayes factors to limit forensic testimony to forensics: composite hypotheses

Generalized fiducial factor: an alternative to the Bayes factor for forensic identification of source problems

Likelihood Ratios for physical traits in forensic investigations