The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
AIC Model Selection in Overdispersed Capture‐Recapture Data
Abstract
Selection of a proper model as a basis for statistical inference from capture—recapture data is critical. This is especially so when using open models in the analysis of multiple, interrelated data sets (e.g., males and females, with 2—3 age classes, over 3—5 areas and 10—15 yr.) The most general model considered for such data sets might contain 1000 survival and recapture parameters. This paper presents numerical results on three information—theoretic methods for model selection when the data are overdispersed (i.e., a lack of independence so that extra—binomial variation occurs). Akaike's information criterion (AIC), a second—order adjustment to AIC for bias (AIC c), and a dimension—consistent criterion (CAIC) were modified using an empirical estimate of the average overdispersion, based on quasi—likelihood theory. Quality of model selection was evaluated based on the Euclidian distance between standardized ° and ° (parameter ° is vector valued); this quantity (a type of residual sum of squares, hence donated as RSS) is a combination of squared bias and variance. Five results seem to be of general interest for these product—multinomial models. First, when there was overdispersion the most direct estimator of the variance inflation factor was positively biased and the relative bias increased with the amount of overdispersion. Second, AIC and AIC c, unadjusted for overdispersion using quasi—likelihood theory, performed poorly in selecting a model with a small RSS value when the data were overdispersed (i.e., overfitted models were selected when compared to the model with the minimum RRS value). Third, the information—theoretic criteria, adjusted for overdispersion, performed well, selected parismonious models, and had a good balance between under— and overfitting the data. Fourth, generally, the dimension—consistent criterion selected models with fewer parameters than the other criteria, had smaller RSS values, but clearly was in error by underfitting when compared with the model with the minimum RSS value. Fifth, even if the true model structure (but not the actual parameter values in the model) is known, that true model, when fitted to the data (by parameter estimation) is a relatively poor basis for statistical inference when that true model includes several, let alone many, estimated parameters that are not significantly different from O.
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
(2005) · Statistics for Biology and Health · doi:10.1007/0-387-27255-0_9 · Cited by 20,133
Information theory and statistics
(1959) · Journal of the Franklin Institute · doi:10.1016/0016-0032(59)90368-0 · Cited by 7,094
Regression and time series model selection in small samples
HURVICH, C. M., & TSAI, C.-L. (1989) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/76.2.297 · Cited by 6,586
Lebreton, J.-D., Burnham, K. P., Clobert, J., & Anderson, D. R. (1992) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/2937171 · Cited by 4,517
Self-citationBozdogan, H. (1987) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02294361 · Cited by 4,468
(2008) · The Concise Encyclopedia of Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-32833-1_5 · Cited by 2,670
Explicit estimates from capture-recapture data with both death and immigration-stochastic model
Jolly, G. M. (1965) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/52.1-2.225 · Cited by 2,605
Information theory as an extension of the maximum likelihood principle
Akaike, H. (1973) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,357
Further analysis of the data by Akaike's information criterion and the finite corrections
Sugiura, N. (1978) · Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods · doi:10.1080/03610927808827599 · Cited by 2,144
Quasi-likelihood functions, generalized linear models, and the Gauss—Newton method
WEDDERBURN, R. W. M. (1974) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/61.3.439 · Cited by 2,122
Cited by
Analysis of frequency count data using the negative binomial distribution
White, G. C., & Bennetts, R. E. (1996) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/2265753 · Cited by 465
Self-citationSuggestions for Presenting the Results of Data Analyses
Anderson, D. R., Link, W. A., Johnson, D. H., & Burnham, K. P. (2001) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3803088 · Cited by 465
Self-citationBorchers, D. L., Buckland, S. T., & Zucchini, W. (2002) · Statistics for Biology and Health · doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-3708-5 · Cited by 344
Linear and generalized linear mixed models
Bolker, B. M. (2015) · Ecological Statistics · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199672547.003.0014 · Cited by 339
Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., & White, G. C. (1998) · Journal of Applied Statistics · doi:10.1080/02664769823250 · Cited by 311
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., & White, G. C.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1994-09
- Volume
- 75
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1780-1793
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9170
- OpenAlex
- W2033662395
- Cited by
- 685
- References
- 36
- FWCI
- 12.04
- 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: AIC Model Selection in Overdispersed Capture‐Recapture Data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1939637
- The paper
- Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., & White, G. C. (1994). AIC Model Selection in Overdispersed Capture‐Recapture Data. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1939637
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.