MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1525428243 · doi:10.20381/ruor-2585

Atlantic Cod Stock: Current Status and Strategic Fisheries Management

2010· article· en· W1525428243 on OpenAlexaffabout
Naman Sharma, Daniel E. Lane, Onur Özveri

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock (firearms)FisheryStock assessmentEndangered speciesFisheries managementMarine fisheriesWildlifeBusinessEnvironmental resource managementGeographyEcologyEnvironmental scienceFishingBiologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a review of the Committee on Endangered Wildlife in Canada criteria used to determine the status of species at risk for commercially exploited marine species designated as “special concern”, and the approach of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans for stock assessment. Cod stocks in the Northwest Atlantic Canadian zones are examined and species status results are analyzed and compared, and updated values for available criteria are provided for some stocks from 2002 through to 2006. The analysis of the updated values suggests that what is needed is a more complete perspective of the fishery system as the context within which the species at risk status is being examined. To this end, a broader set of stock status indicators for the assessment of marine species is proposed that takes into account available information including all fisheries stock assessment data. A monitoring program is presented based on the principles of quality control as a guideline for stock status assessment and risk analysis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)Same topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207