MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022596034 · doi:10.1080/14634980802690790

Filling a data gap – Lake whitefish (<i>Coregonus clupeaformis</i>) index netting in the North Channel of Lake Huron

2009· article· en· W2022596034 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Kimberley Carmichael, Caroline Deary

Bibliographic record

VenueAquatic Ecosystem Health & Management · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsCoregonus clupeaformisNettingFisheryChristian ministryFishingCoregonusGeographyChannel (broadcasting)Index (typography)Fish <Actinopterygii>BiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Anishinabek/Ontario Fisheries Resource Centre collaborated with the First Nation communities along the North Channel of Lake Huron – Aundeck-Omni-Kaning, Mississauga, Sagamok Anishnawbek, Serpent River and Wikwemikong Unceded – on a 5-year lake whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) index netting project. The impetus for this undertaking was concern that adequate information was not available for the derivation of the commercial catch quotas by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Traditional First Nation fishing waters were sampled from 2000 to 2004 using the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources index netting methodology. A total of 2,760 lake whitefish were caught in 468 net sets, representing up to 17 year classes. The catch-per-unit-effort, as well as the number of year classes represented in the catch, was greater in Aundeck-Omni-Kaning than in the other four areas in the North Channel. The size and age at which 50% of lake whitefish are mature, ranged from 350 mm to 520 mm and 3 to 5 years, respectively. The data gathered from this study augmented the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources biological catch data and was used in their statistical catch-at-age models for the derivation of lake whitefish commercial catch quotas in the North Channel.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAquatic Ecosystem Health & ManagementSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207