The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Equivalence of MAXENT and Poisson Point Process Models for Species Distribution Modeling in Ecology
Abstract
Summary: Modeling the spatial distribution of a species is a fundamental problem in ecology. A number of modeling methods have been developed, an extremely popular one being MAXENT, a maximum entropy modeling approach. In this article, we show that MAXENT is equivalent to a Poisson regression model and hence is related to a Poisson point process model, differing only in the intercept term, which is scale‐dependent in MAXENT. We illustrate a number of improvements to MAXENT that follow from these relations. In particular, a point process model approach facilitates methods for choosing the appropriate spatial resolution, assessing model adequacy, and choosing the LASSO penalty parameter, all currently unavailable to MAXENT. The equivalence result represents a significant step in the unification of the species distribution modeling literature.
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
Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso
Tibshirani, R. (1996) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1996.tb02080.x · Cited by 51,482
McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1989) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3242-6 · Cited by 16,836
Information theory and statistical mechanics
Jaynes, E. T. (1957) · Physical Review · doi:10.1103/physrev.106.620 · Cited by 12,931
A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists
Elith, J., Phillips, S. J., Hastie, T., Dudík, M., Chee, Y. E., & Yates, C. J. (2011) · Diversity and Distributions · doi:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00725.x · Cited by 6,699
Cressie, N. A. C. (1993) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/9781119115151 · Cited by 6,507
Cited by
Merow, C., Smith, M. J., & Silander, J. A. (2013) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2013.07872.x · Cited by 3,392
Opening the black box: an open‐source release of Maxent
Phillips, S. J., Anderson, R. P., Dudík, M., Schapire, R. E., & Blair, M. E. (2017) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/ecog.03049 · Cited by 2,729
Muscarella, R., Galante, P. J., Soley‐Guardia, M., Boria, R. A., Kass, J. M., Uriarte, M., & Anderson, R. P. (2014) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12261 · Cited by 1,962
Making better M axent models of species distributions: complexity, overfitting and evaluation
Radosavljevic, A., & Anderson, R. P. (2014) · Journal of Biogeography · doi:10.1111/jbi.12227 · Cited by 1,723
The importance of correcting for sampling bias in MaxEnt species distribution models
Kramer‐Schadt, S., Niedballa, J., Pilgrim, J. D., Schröder, B., Lindenborn, J., Reinfelder, V., Stillfried, M., Heckmann, I., Scharf, A. K., Augeri, D. M., et al. (2013) · Diversity and Distributions · doi:10.1111/ddi.12096 · Cited by 1,321
Metadata
- Authors
- Renner, I. W., & Warton, D. I.
- Venue
- Biometrics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-02-04
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 274-281
- ISSN
- 0006-341X (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0420
- OpenAlex
- W1494196016
- Cited by
- 463
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 21.58
- 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: Equivalence of MAXENT and Poisson Point Process Models for Species Distribution Modeling in Ecology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2012.01824.x
- The paper
- Renner, I. W., & Warton, D. I. (2013). Equivalence of MAXENT and Poisson Point Process Models for Species Distribution Modeling in Ecology. Biometrics. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2012.01824.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.
