Comparisons within and between years resulting in contrasting recruitment of Pacific hake (<i>Merluccius productus</i>) in the California Current System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a search for correlates and possible causes of the difference in recruitment success of Pacific hake (Merluccius productus) of the 1981 and 1984 year-classes, we analyzed (by optical plankton counter) the distribution into sizes of preserved zooplankton samples from stations with and without larval hake in winter and spring of these two years. We also assessed the onshore/offshore distributions of larvae, potential for geostrophic and Ekman transport, and their overall survival rates. Cluster analyses of biovolume spectra led to the development of a simple ratio of "medium" to "small + large" zooplankton that statistically separated stations within a year where larval hake were likely to be found from those where they were unlikely to be found. This biovolume ratio was independent of temperature, and the same ratio statistically distinguished stations where larval hake tended to occur in spring 1998. However, we found no property or process that might explain why the 1984 year-class was spectacularly successful.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".