Calculating the probability of an animal finding a resource

AI Thread Summary
The probability of a model animal finding water in a 17 km² landscape is initially calculated at 0.0462 based on the size of the water pool. If the animal can search continuously at a speed of 1 m/second with a 500 m detection range, it can effectively cover the entire area in less than five hours, resulting in a probability of 1 for finding the water within a day. The search efficiency is influenced by the animal's movement patterns, which may not follow ideal paths. While the size of the water pool impacts search time, it does not increase the probability of finding the pool, as the animal can still detect it within its search radius. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the importance of search algorithms and patterns in determining the likelihood of resource discovery.
killbot2000
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I'd like some help working out the probability of my model animal finding water in a day.

In my 'model' there is a square landscape 17km^2
The water pool is a circle of 500m radius (so approx 0.7854km^2)
So in a one off shot the chances of hitting the water is 0.7854/17 = 0.0462 right?

But if I suppose that the animal can search over the course of a day, how can I incorporate this into increasing its prob. of finding the water?

Assume for the sake of argument that it can travel at 1m/second and has a 500m detection range then it should 'cut out' circles the same radius as the water pool every 1000 seconds. Then I think it would cut out 86400/1000 = 86.4 in day.

If this is correct how can I convert it into a probability?

I know this is a ramble, but I've been at it all morning, so any help would be much appreciated!
 
Biology news on Phys.org
So in a one off shot the chances of hitting the water is 0.7854/17 = 0.0462 right?
If the animal magically appears at a random position in the landscape, this is the probability that it will appear in the water.

But if I suppose that the animal can search over the course of a day, how can I incorporate this into increasing its prob. of finding the water?
It depends on the way it searches for water.

Neglecting effects at the edges of the landscape, your model animal can search 1000m2 per second. With an ideal path, it would need roughly 17000 seconds to see the whole landscape, less than 5 hours. The probability to find the pool within a day is 1, independent of its size.

Real animals rarely walk on those ideal lines, so the probability depends on the walking algorithm.
 
What's the probability of an animal appearing out of thin air into an area to which it's never been?
 
mfb said:
If the animal magically appears at a random position in the landscape, this is the probability that it will appear in the water.

It depends on the way it searches for water.

Neglecting effects at the edges of the landscape, your model animal can search 1000m2 per second. With an ideal path, it would need roughly 17000 seconds to see the whole landscape, less than 5 hours. The probability to find the pool within a day is 1, independent of its size.

Real animals rarely walk on those ideal lines, so the probability depends on the walking algorithm.

Pool size radius matters: ( versus a search independant of pool radius )
Even less search time for a 500 radius water pool. Search radius would be detection radius 500m plus the water pool radius giving a total 1000m search radius ( assuming pool edge detection ). A 5km by 3.5 km grid (17.5 square km ) could be searched in 2 passes. So, not exactly, but somewhere around 9000 seconds of search required.

In fact a 5 x 4 km rectangular area could be searched in less than 10000 seconds ( again assuming edge detection of the water pool ).
 
256bits said:
Pool size radius matters
It reduces searching time, but it does not increase the probability to find the pool.

pool edge detection
:D

If the pool is circular and fully within the search area, we can do even better. We can ignore 1km on both sides of the 5km-range, and the total travel distance is below 8.5km*.
A 3x6km-area would require at most 6km, as it can be done in a single pass.

*Edit: Below ##(6.5 + \sqrt{2})km \approx 7.9km##.
 
https://www.nhs.uk/mental-health/conditions/body-dysmorphia/ Most people have some mild apprehension about their body, such as one thinks their nose is too big, hair too straight or curvy. At the extreme, cases such as this, are difficult to completely understand. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/health/other/why-would-someone-want-to-amputate-healthy-limbs/ar-AA1MrQK7?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=68ce4014b1fe4953b0b4bd22ef471ab9&ei=78 they feel like they're an amputee in the body of a regular person "For...
Thread 'Did they discover another descendant of homo erectus?'
The study provides critical new insights into the African Humid Period, a time between 14,500 and 5,000 years ago when the Sahara desert was a green savanna, rich in water bodies that facilitated human habitation and the spread of pastoralism. Later aridification turned this region into the world's largest desert. Due to the extreme aridity of the region today, DNA preservation is poor, making this pioneering ancient DNA study all the more significant. Genomic analyses reveal that the...
Whenever these opiods are mentioned they usually mention that e.g. fentanyl is "50 times stronger than heroin" and "100 times stronger than morphine". Now it's nitazene which the public is told is everything from "much stronger than heroin" and "200 times stronger than fentany"! Do these numbers make sense at all? How do they arrive at them? Kill thousands of mice? En passant: nitazene have already been found in both Oxycontin pills and in street "heroin" here, so Naloxone is more...
Back
Top