Using adaptive line-transect sampling in airborne geophysics studies

References

• Basu, D. 1969. Role of the sufficiency and likelihood principles in sample survey theory. Sankhy$\bar{a}$ A 31:441–454.
   Google Scholar
• Buckland, S. T., D. R. Anderson, K. P. Burnham, J. L. Laake, D. L. Borchers, and L. Thomas 2001. Introduction to Distance Sampling. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Buckland, S. T., D. R. Anderson, K. P. Burnham, J. L. Laake, D. L. Borchers, and L. Thomas 2004. Advanced Distance Sampling Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Godambe, V. P. 1955. A unified theory of sampling from finite populations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 17:269–278.
   Google Scholar
• Marques, F. F. C., and S. T. Buckland 2004. Covariate Models for the Detection Function. In: Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., Laake, J. L., Borchers, D. L., Thomas, L., eds., Advanced Distance Sampling. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 31–47.
   Google Scholar
• Marques, T., S. T. Borchers Buckland, E. D. L. Rexstad, and L. Thomas 2011. Distance Sampling. In M. Lovric, ed., International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 398–400.
   Google Scholar
• McCullagh, P., and J. A. Nelder 1989. Generalized Linear Models. London: Chapman and Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Minty, B. R. S. 1997. Fundamental of airborne gamma-ray spectrometry. Journal of Australian Geology & Geophysics 17(2):39–50.
   Google Scholar
• Naddeo, S., and C. Pisani 2005. Two-stage adaptive cluster sampling. Statistical Methods & Applications 14:3–10. DOI: 10.1007/s10260-004-0091-5.
   Google Scholar
• Pollard, J. H. 2002. Adaptive Distance Sampling. Ph.D. thesis, University of St. Andrews.
   Google Scholar
• Pollard, J. H., and S. T. Buckland 1997. A strategy for adaptive sampling in shipboard line transect surveys. Report of the International Whaling Commission 47:921–931.
   Google Scholar
• Pontius, S. J. 1997. Strip adaptive cluster sampling: Probability proportional to size selection of primary units. Biometrics 53:1092–1096.
   Google Scholar
• Robertson, B. L., J. A. Brown, T. McDonald, and P. Jaksons 2013. BAS: Balanced acceptance sampling of natural resources. Biometrics 69:776–784.
   Google Scholar
• Sanderson, D. C. W., A. J. Cresswell, F. Hardeman, and A. Debauche 2004. An airborne gamma-ray spectrometry survey of nuclear sites in Belgium. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 72:213–224.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, D. R., B. R. Gray, T. J. Newton, and D. Nichols 2010. Effect of imperfect detectability on adaptive and conventional sampling: Simulated sampling of freshwater mussels in the upper Mississippi River. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 170:499–507. Doi: 10.1007/s10661-009-1251-8.
   Google Scholar
• Strindberg, S. 2001. Optimized Automated Survey Design in Wildlife Population Assessment. Ph.D. thesis, University of St. Andrews.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, L., S. T. Buckland, K. P. Burnham, D. R. Anderson, J. L. Laake, D. L. Borchers, and S. Strindberg 2012. Encyclopedia of Environmetrics Article on Distance Sampling. New York: Wiley and Sons. (I), pp. 687–697. Doi: 10.1002/9780470057339.vad033.pub2.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, S. K. 1990. Adaptive cluster sampling. Journal of the American Statistical Association 85:1050–1059.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, S. K., and G. A. F. Seber 1994. Detectability in conventional and adaptive sampling. Biometrics 50:712–724.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, S. K., and G. A. F. Seber 1996. Adaptive Sampling. New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Young, M. E., J. D. Appleton, D. Beamish, R. J. Cuss, C. L. van Dam, and D. G. Jones et al. 2007. Airborne Geophysical Mapping of Environmental Features: Examples from Northern Ireland. Bicentennial Conference, London, UK, pp. 10–12 Sept. London, UK: Geological Society of London.
   Google Scholar