The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Nonidentifiability of Population Size from Capture‐Recapture Data with Heterogeneous Detection Probabilities
Abstract
Summary. Heterogeneity in detection probabilities has long been recognized as problematic in mark‐recapture studies, and numerous models developed to accommodate its effects. Individual heterogeneity is especially problematic, in that reasonable alternative models may predict essentially identical observations from populations of substantially different sizes. Thus even with very large samples, the analyst will not be able to distinguish among reasonable models of heterogeneity, even though these yield quite distinct inferences about population size. The problem is illustrated with models for closed and open populations.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Citations
Cites
Hapeman, D. E. (1991) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1991.10484817 · Cited by 9,373
Introduction to Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations
Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., Laake, J. L., Borchers, D. L., & Thomas, L. (2001) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198506492.001.0001 · Cited by 3,055
Fleiss, J. L., & Agresti, A. (1991) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290537 · Cited by 2,641
Estimation of the size of a closed population when capture probabilities vary among animals
BURNHAM, K. P., & OVERTON, W. S. (1978) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/65.3.625 · Cited by 818
Unified Maximum Likelihood Estimates for Closed Capture–Recapture Models Using Mixtures
Pledger, S. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00434.x · Cited by 539
Estimating Animal Abundance: Review III
Schwarz, C. J., & Seber, G. A. F. (1999) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/ss/1009212521 · Cited by 519
A Review of Estimating Animal Abundance
Seber, G. A. F. (1986) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531049 · Cited by 516
Nonparametric MLE under Two Closed Capture-Recapture Models with Heterogeneity
Norris, J. L., & Pollock, K. H. (1996) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2532902 · Cited by 240
Dorazio, R. M., & Andrew Royle, J. (2003) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/1541-0420.00042 · Cited by 226
Estimating the Size of a Multinomial Population
Sanathanan, L. (1972) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177692709 · Cited by 203
Cited by
Camera Traps in Animal Ecology
(2011) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-4-431-99495-4 · Cited by 759
Estimating animal population density using passive acoustics
Marques, T. A., Thomas, L., Martin, S. W., Mellinger, D. K., Ward, J. A., Moretti, D. J., Harris, D., & Tyack, P. L. (2013) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12001 · Cited by 746
Estimating Size and Composition of Biological Communities by Modeling the Occurrence of Species
Dorazio, R. M., & Royle, J. A. (2005) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/016214505000000015 · Cited by 567
Guillera‐Arroita, G. (2017) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/ecog.02445 · Cited by 426
GENERALIZED SITE OCCUPANCY MODELS ALLOWING FOR FALSE POSITIVE AND FALSE NEGATIVE ERRORS
Royle, J. A., & Link, W. A. (2006) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[835:gsomaf]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 389
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Link, W. A.
- Venue
- Biometrics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-12
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1123-1130
- ISSN
- 0006-341X (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0420
- OpenAlex
- W2033936134
- Cited by
- 301
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 10.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Nonidentifiability of Population Size from Capture‐Recapture Data with Heterogeneous Detection Probabilities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.0006-341x.2003.00129.x
- The paper
- Link, W. A. (2003). Nonidentifiability of Population Size from Capture‐Recapture Data with Heterogeneous Detection Probabilities. Biometrics. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341x.2003.00129.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
