MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2056935694 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2013-0522

Fishing suitability maps: helping fishermen reduce discards

2015· article· en· W2056935694 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Raúl Vilela, J.M. Bellido-Millán

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsDiscardsFishingFisheryContext (archaeology)SustainabilityFisheries managementEnvironmental resource managementGeographyOverfishingEnvironmental scienceEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discards poses a serious problem for the productivity and sustainability of European fisheries and thus is an important fisheries and ecological management issue to be solved. In this paper we present a statistical tool, based on the random forest technique, that aims to reduce the negative ecological impact of fishing by providing fishermen with near-real-time maps of a fishing suitability index based on haul-by-haul catch and discard rates, indicating the most suitable areas for fishing. These easy-to-interpret maps are to be accessible to users via an online geoportal. Observer data from the Spanish discard sampling program from 2004 to 2008 for several species caught in the Cantabrian Sea (ICES area VIIIc) were used to illustrate the random forest approach. Results in the case study varied among species and seasons, with better results achieved for balanced datasets, such as those for economically valuable target species with segregated life stages. We discuss how this online tool could be useful for fisheries management, particularly in the context of the European Common Fisheries Policy reform and the discard ban on commercial species.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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