[Babase] Morris (MOR) and interpolation rules in members table + incomplete censuses!

Susan Alberts alberts at duke.edu
Thu Aug 20 17:04:42 EDT 2009


> On a related question, Jeanne and Susan, we have in this update a  
> lot of incomplete census data.  ....
>
> In the case of current data generated by Courtney (and probably  
> older data generated by others), this means that sometimes males who  
> move around a lot are verified as absent on an incomplete census day  
> though they had been present on the previous full census day (and  
> may be either present or absent on the next full census day).  With  
> the way uploads work I cannot enter such incomplete census data with  
> the full census data because every individual listed in the sheet  
> must be marked either present or absent and we don't have that data  
> for every individual on those dates.  I could, if desired, either  
> use a demog note to mark them as present with an unknown group (9.0)

This seems like a good option in these cases. But as you noted  
earlier, we currently don't use "not here" info in demog notes. Would  
doing so require any structural or any other changes to data entry or  
babase?

> or create a separate file just for incomplete census days for those  
> males that move around a lot to better capture their movements (and  
> in some cases avoid interpolation of presence with a group when we  
> know they were in fact absent).  The latter method would help me  
> track the males movements between groups and wo!
> uld probably be less prone to error than marking them as present  
> with an unknown group.

I am very happy with this method but I understood that incomplete  
censuses are a huge amount of work. How often does this happen? Is it  
feasible for you to do this?

> Sometimes we already know where they were because they showed up in  
> another group on or before the incomplete census day on which they  
> were marked absent but in other cases their whereabouts are unknown.

So in these cases you don't need the "not here" info in the incomplete  
censuses. But, sometimes you do need it.

> Please let me know if this is an issue that is worth the extra  
> trouble of creating and uploading additional data for these males.

We do need the info, but I am comfortable with you deciding which of  
these two methods you propose will work better.

Susan

>
> Thanks,
> Niki
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karl O. Pinc [mailto:kop at meme.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 6:06 PM
> To: The Baboon Database Project
> Cc: Niki Learn
> Subject: Re: [Babase] Morris (MOR) and interpolation rules in  
> members table.
>
> Hi,
>
> There are no special interpolation rules for males.  I do
> recall some talk about it but I thought we decided against
> making the end of the month be special in that way.
>
> As far as females and juveniles go, there's few problems
> because the individuals get marked dead and this stops
> interpolation.  The other "backstop" is that interpolation
> does not happen until "later data", either censuses noting
> the individual present or noting them absent, is entered.
> This keeps interpolation from making assumptions about
> what happens after "the end of time", the last census data
> for an individual that's still living.  Dead individuals
> can be interpolated after the last entered census
> based on the date of death.  (More on this below.)
>
> There are 2 ways to stop males from interpolating.
> You could use a non-interpolating census code
> ("manual" or some other) to record the last date
> you want the individual in the group.  At this point
> you are manually doing what the interpolation does.
>
> The other way to go is to ensure that there's
> always a subsequent absence recorded, even
> if the individual leaves the group at the very
> end of the month. (Vis Niki's point below.)
> I recall quite a bit of discussion
> about this some time ago.  There can be a problem
> for females and juveniles as well, even if they
> do wind up marked dead.  If say, a female is
> censused present the last day of the month
> but is absent thereafter, the female's group membership
> should be in the unknown group if the death date
> is long enough after the last time she
> was censused present.  For example, she
> might be sick, and censused present on the
> 31st of the month and then absent on the
> first.  Perhaps the 4th is assigned as
> the death date.  If the absence on the first
> is not recorded then interpolation will place
> the individual in the group on the first, even
> though she was censused absent.
>
> I'm against Susan's proposal for "male interpolation"
> rules for a number of reasons, but there's
> no point in going over this right now.  (Ultimately, I don't think
> it can be reliably implemented, but that's something
> we can determine if we want to talk further and work
> out exactly what it is that we'd want implemented.)  There was so much
> discussion regarding the import of continuing to enter
> absences for the next month after an individual disappears
> that it should not be hard to find in the archives.
> The problem is more apparent with males, but
> can crop up with females and juveniles as well
> depending on when the censuses are taken and when
> the death date is assigned.  I thought we had something
> about this recorded in the data entry manual....
>
> On 08/18/2009 02:32:49 PM, Niki Learn wrote:
>> Karl,
>>
>> We have a babase puzzle for you.
>>
>> Jeanne, Susan, and I have been conversing over the male Morris.  It
>> all began when they were puzzled by his having a bstatus of 9 (which
>> has impacts on Jordi's tooth abrasion data) since they were confident
>> that he was of reasonably well-known age for an immigrant male.
>> While
>> investigating the bstatus issue we found some other irregularities.
>> A
>> couple are related to mistakes in oddball census information but one
>> involves the interpolation rules for the members table.  Please see
>> the excerpts from the email string below and let me know what the
>> current situation is on interpolating member presence for males
>> (i.e.,
>> is the 14-day rule in place for them even in study groups where
>> censuses have been going on and the male is not marked as present or
>> was this altered as Susan thought).  I guess we'll move forward from
>> there.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Niki
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Babase mailing list
> Babase at www.eco.princeton.edu
> http://www.eco.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/babase



More information about the Babase mailing list