pdgcontrol
Value of information
Exploring causes for deviation from S = D
in the Reed model: arises from selfsustaining assumption. Working out the interpretation of the selfsustaining clause, which sounds like it needs to ensure that the stock is nondecreasing in the absence of harvest,
\[ P(X_{t+1} \geq x  X_n = x ) = 1 \]
This sounds like a very awkward condition to enforce for a nontrivial escapement level \( x = S \). Why should the population be guarenteed to increase from itâ€™s escapement population size?
Given the definition
\[ X_{t+1} = Z_t f(X_t) \]
and the condition that we have to have
\[ \operatorname{E}(Z_t f(X_t) ) = f(X_t) \]
that is, $ Z_t $ has to be mean unity, then some shocks must result in
$ X_{t+1} f(X_t) $
for any nontrivial \(Z_t\). So how do we enforce that these decreases do not violate the selfsustaining principle?
It would seem to require at least that \(Z_t\) is a function of \(X\) as well?
Reed seems to imply that this is a much more trivial requirement, such as stating only that \(f(x)\) is compensating density dependence (such as Beverton Holt), and not overcompensating (such as the discrete logistic).
 Write a flat tex outline for policy costs (policy costs)
 Compare the probability of detection in managed and unmanaged models. (resilience thinking)
 Confirm Reed S==D theorem, evaluate in Sethi context (value of information) See notes below.

Run scenarios with very low noise, instead of deterministic (value of information), running for
uniform_logistic
now  Rerun bias table with measurement noise (value of information). Done, compare against history.
Other
 PRSB review
 Send Hilmar the ropensci slides
treebase revisions
 Conference possibility?
Substantially updated octokit plugin, see labnotebook issue #11.