MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982667497 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11243

Robust state space models for estimating fish stock maturities

2015· article· en· W1982667497 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ximing Xu, Eva Cantoni, Joanna Mills Flemming, Chris Field

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFish stockRobustness (evolution)Stock (firearms)InferenceEconometricsComputer scienceStatisticsFisheryMathematicsFish <Actinopterygii>GeographyArtificial intelligenceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Here, we formulate robust state space models (SSMs) and develop inference tools in the context of fisheries science and management. Our prototype model concerns the maturity of fish by age over time, knowledge of which is fundamental to understanding the dynamics and productivity of fish stocks, a key component in fish stock assessment. Our SSM incorporates dynamics over time and yields robust estimates of the proportion of fish mature at various ages for a collection of cohorts of interest. The estimates are obtained using an iterative weighted likelihood where the high‐dimensional unobserved dynamics of the SSM and the optimization over the fixed parameters are handled with the Automatic Differentiation Model Builder. The data used to both demonstrate and validate our new approach comes from the annual sampling program of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, the primary scientific and regulatory body responsible for stock assessments. In addition, we carried out a comprehensive simulation study to demonstrate the robustness of our approach to realistic contamination. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 43: 133–150; 2015 © 2015 Statistical Society of Canada

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score0.874

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207