Predicting animal movement with deepSSF : A deep learning step selection framework
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Predictions of animal movement are vital for understanding and managing wild populations. However, the fine‐scale, complex decision‐making of animals can pose challenges for the accurate prediction of trajectories. Integrated step selection functions (iSSFs), a common tool for inferring relationships between animal movement and the environment, are also increasingly used to simulate animal trajectories for prediction. Although admitting a lot of flexibility, the iSSF framework is limited to its reliance on pre‐defined functional forms for fitting to data, and iSSFs that involve complex functional forms to model detailed processes can be prohibitively difficult to fit and interpret. Here, we present deepSSF, an approach to fit and predict animal movement data using deep learning. The deepSSF approach replaces the log‐linear model of an iSSF with a neural network architecture that receives multiple environmental layers and scalar values as inputs and outputs a single layer representing the next‐step probability. We demonstrate an example deepSSF model, built in PyTorch , consisting of distinct but interacting habitat selection and movement subnetworks. This allows for explicit representation of both selection and movement processes, thus giving interpretable intermediate outputs. We apply our model to GPS data of introduced water buffalo ( Bubalus bubalis ) in the tropical savannas of Northern Australia. Our deepSSF model was able to learn features that are present in the habitat covariate layers, such as linear features (rivers, forest edges) and the composition of certain habitat areas, without having to specify them pre‐emptively within the model framework. It was able to capture complex interactions between the habitat covariates as well as temporal dynamics across time of day and year. Finally, our deepSSF model generally had better in‐ and out‐of‐sample predictive accuracy than the analogous iSSF model. We expect that the deepSSF approach will generate accurate and informative predictions about animal movement, which can be used for deepening our understanding of animal–environment systems and for the practical management of species. We discuss how the wide range of existing deep learning tools could enable the deepSSF approach to be extended to represent memory and social dynamic processes, with the potential for integrating non‐spatial data sources such as accelerometers and physiological sensors.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764 · see citing works
Explainable AI (XAI): Core Ideas, Techniques, and Solutions
Dwivedi, R., Dave, D., Naik, H., Singhal, S., Omer, R., Patel, P., Qian, B., Wen, Z., Shah, T., Morgan, G., et al. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3561048 · Cited by 1,386 · see citing works
Wolves influence elk movements: Behavior shapes a trophic cascade in Yellowstone National Park
Fortin, D., Beyer, H. L., Boyce, M. S., Smith, D. W., Duchesne, T., & Mao, J. S. (2005) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/04-0953 · Cited by 1,351 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Forrest, S. W., Pagendam, D., Hassan, C., Potts, J. R., Drovandi, C., Bode, M., & Hoskins, A. J.
- Affiliations
- Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
- Queensland University of Technology (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Forrest, Scott W.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Methods in Ecology and Evolution
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2025-08-13
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 371-391
- ISSN
- 2041-210X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4413164416
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3
- FWCI
- 1.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Methods in Ecology and Evolution (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- Aaltodoc (Aalto University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Australian Government (Smart Farming Partnerships Program (round 2))
- Australian Research Council (FT210100260)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecological Modeling › Species Distribution and Climate Change
- Keywords
- step selection function, artificial neural networks, habitat selection, GPS tracking, water buffalo, introduced species, habitat covariates, trajectory simulation, animal-environment interactions, savanna, northern Australia
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review