MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Catch Estimation in the Presence of Declining Catch Rate Due to Gear Saturation

2001· article· en· W1964757745 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicSurvey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEstimatorFishingStatisticsBycatchEconometricsFisheryMathematicsComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One strategy for estimating total catch is to employ two separate surveys that independently estimate total fishing effort and catch rate with the estimator for total catch formed by their product. Survey designs for estimating catch rate often involve interviewing the fishermen during their fishing episodes. Such roving designs result in incomplete episode data and characteristically have employed a model in which the catch rate is assumed to be constant over time. This article extends the problem to that of estimating total catch in the presence of a declining catch rate due, e.g., to gear saturation. Using a gill net fishery as an example, a mean-of-ratios type of estimator for the catch rate together with its variance estimator are developed. Their performance is examined using simulations, with special attention given to effects of restrictions on the roving survey window. Finally, data from a Fraser River gill net fishery are used to illustrate the use of the proposed estimator and to compare results with those from an estimator based on a constant catch rate.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.235 · 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