Last active
January 7, 2025 18:06
Hudson Bay company Lynx-Hare dataset from Leigh 1968, parsed from paper copy http://katalog.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/titel/66489211 (This is the entire Table II)
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
year | hare | lynx | |
---|---|---|---|
1847 | 21000 | 49000 | |
1848 | 12000 | 21000 | |
1849 | 24000 | 9000 | |
1850 | 50000 | 7000 | |
1851 | 80000 | 5000 | |
1852 | 80000 | 5000 | |
1853 | 90000 | 11000 | |
1854 | 69000 | 22000 | |
1855 | 80000 | 33000 | |
1856 | 93000 | 33000 | |
1857 | 72000 | 27000 | |
1858 | 27000 | 18000 | |
1859 | 14000 | 8000 | |
1860 | 16000 | 4000 | |
1861 | 38000 | 4000 | |
1862 | 5000 | 4000 | |
1863 | 153000 | 20000 | |
1864 | 145000 | 35000 | |
1865 | 106000 | 68000 | |
1866 | 46000 | 70000 | |
1867 | 23000 | 40000 | |
1868 | 2000 | 22000 | |
1869 | 4000 | 9000 | |
1870 | 8000 | 5000 | |
1871 | 7000 | 4000 | |
1872 | 60000 | 10000 | |
1873 | 46000 | 18000 | |
1874 | 50000 | 19000 | |
1875 | 103000 | 43000 | |
1876 | 87000 | 37000 | |
1877 | 68000 | 22000 | |
1878 | 17000 | 15000 | |
1879 | 10000 | 10000 | |
1880 | 17000 | 8000 | |
1881 | 16000 | 8000 | |
1882 | 15000 | 30000 | |
1883 | 46000 | 52000 | |
1884 | 55000 | 75000 | |
1885 | 137000 | 80000 | |
1886 | 137000 | 33000 | |
1887 | 95000 | 20000 | |
1888 | 37000 | 13000 | |
1889 | 22000 | 7000 | |
1890 | 50000 | 6000 | |
1891 | 54000 | 10000 | |
1892 | 65000 | 20000 | |
1893 | 60000 | 35000 | |
1894 | 81000 | 55000 | |
1895 | 95000 | 40000 | |
1896 | 56000 | 28000 | |
1897 | 18000 | 16000 | |
1898 | 5000 | 5000 | |
1899 | 2000 | 6000 | |
1900 | 15000 | 10000 | |
1901 | 2000 | 21000 | |
1902 | 6000 | 35000 | |
1903 | 45000 | 50000 |
Thanks for your time Michael.
Indeed I was suspecting that the typo comes from the original authors. Maybe it is not a typo, as the hare population is quite noisy all along the dataset, possibly due to external factors that do not affect the lynx population as much.
Thanks for your suggestions, i will be trying them out. 😄
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
hi @AdriaCoding, thanks for commenting.
I checked it again and it turns out that I have a typo, but it's not what you pointed at: its Table III not Table II.
The scan available at https://archive.org/details/somemathematical0000symp_o1x7 clearly shows "5,000" hare in 1862.
I do feel sorry for your ML model, but the dataset says 5,000 and if that was a typo, it happened more than half a century ago.
You might want to try a Student-t for the loss or likehood function to get some robustness against outliers.
best
Michael