Value of information in product recovery decisions: A Bayesian approach

There is a widespread recognition of the need for better information sharing and provision to improve the viability of end-of-life (EOL) product recovery operations. The emergence of automated data capture and sharing technologies such as RFID, sensors and networked databases has enhanced the ability to make product information; available to recoverers, which will help them make better decisions regarding the choice of recovery option for EOL products. However, these technologies come with a cost attached to it, and hence the question 'what is its value?' is critical. This paper presents a probabilistic approach to model product recovery decisions and extends the concept of Bayes' factor for quantifying the impact of product information on the effectiveness of these decisions. Further, we provide a quantitative examination of the factors that influence the value of product information, this value depends on three factors: (i) penalties for Type I and Type II errors of judgement regarding product quality; (ii) prevalent uncertainty regarding product quality and (iii) the strength of the information to support/contradict the belief. Furthermore, we show that information is not valuable under all circumstances and derive conditions for achieving a positive value of information. © 2010 Taylor & Francis.

Visibility recovery on images acquired in attenuating media. Application to underwater, fog, and mammographic imaging

136 p.

Effects of a large fishing closure on benthic communities in the western Gulf of Maine: recovery from the effects of gillnets and otter trawls

The recovery of benthic communities inside the western Gulf of Maine fishing closure area was evaluated by comparing invertebrate assemblages at sites inside and outside of the closure four to six years after the closure was established. The major restriction imposed by the closure was a year-round prohibition of bottom gillnets and otter trawls. A total of 163 seafloor sites (~half inside and half outside the closure) within a 515-km2 study area were sampled with some combination of Shipek grab, Wildco box corer, or underwater video. Bottom types ranged from mud (silt and clay) to boulders, and the effects of the closure on univariate measures (total density, biomass, taxonomic richness) of benthos varied widely among sediment types. For sites with predominantly mud sediments, there were mixed effects on inside and outside infauna and no effect on epifauna. For sites with mainly sand sediments, there were higher density, biomass, and taxonomic richness for infauna inside the closure, but no significant effects on epifauna. For sites dominated by gravel (which included boulders in some areas), there were no effects on infauna but strong effects on epifaunal density and taxonomic richness. For fishing gear, the data indicated that infauna recovered in sand from the impacts of otter trawls operated inside the closure but that they did not recover in mud, and that epifauna recovered on gravel bottoms from the impact of gillnets used inside the closure. The magnitudes of impact and recovery, however, cannot be inferred directly from our data because of a confounding factor of different fishing intensities outside the closure for a direct comparison of preclosure and postclosure data. The overall negative impact of trawls is likely underestimated by our data, whereas the negative impact of gillnets is likely overestimated.