English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We can describe the size evolution of a harvested population in a randomly varying environment using stochastic differential equations. Previously, we have compared the profit performance of four harvesting policies: (i) optimal variable effort policy, based on variable effort; (ii) optimal penalized variable effort policies, penalized versions based on including an artificial running energy cost on the effort; (iii) stepwise policies, staircase versions where the harvesting effort is determined at the beginning of each year (or of each biennium) and kept constant throughout that year (or biennium); (iv) constant harvesting effort sustainable policy, based on constant effort. They have different properties, so it is also worth looking at combinations of such policies and studying the single and cross-effects of the amount of penalization, the absence or presence and type of steps, and the restraints on minimum and maximum allowed efforts. Using data based on a real harvested population and considering a logistic growth model, we perform such a comparison study of pure and mixed policies in terms of profit, applicability, and other relevant properties. We end up answering the question: is the optimal enemy of the good?

Harvesting optimization with stochastic differential equations models: is the optimal enemy of the good?