MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1726326728 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2012-0166

An empirical model of seasonal depth-dependent fish assemblage structure to predict the species composition of mixed catches

2012· article· en· W1726326728 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Hugues P. Benoît

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlatfishFishingFisherySebastesComposition (language)EcologyGeographyBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliable catch statistics are essential for assessing fishing impacts on individual stocks. However, fisheries that capture a mixture of stocks or species for which catch statistics are not disaggregated pose a challenge. Nonetheless, catch composition can be inferred given information on fishing date and location and a prevalent role of season and habitat in structuring fish assemblage composition. Here, a harmonic regression model for multinomial data, intended to predict the species composition of catches based on season and depth, is developed using bottom-trawl survey data. Model development was motivated by the need to quantify catches of individual skate (Rajidae) species in fisheries for which landing and discard data are only reliable at the family level. The model was validated by applying it to flatfishes (Pleuronectidae), whose catches are generally reliably and consistently disaggregated by species. The predicted species composition of flatfish matched the composition observed in fishery catches well. The present approach should be applicable to other well-surveyed ecosystems where assemblage composition is structured by one or more key environmental variables of known spatial distribution.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→