The Influence of Weather Conditions on the Relative Incident Rate of Fishing Vessels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a long history of studying the relationship between weather and maritime activities. This article analyzes the link between relative incident rate (RIR) and general weather factors within certain gridded areas and time periods. The study area, which encompasses a broad extent of Atlantic Canadian waters, includes fishing incidents recorded by the Canadian Coast Guard from 1997 to 1999. Methodologies used for traffic track generation in a geographical information system and aggregation of all relevant weather data needed for the statistical analyses are presented. Ultimately, a regression tree was built to illustrate the relationship between incident rate and the following six weather factors: wave height; sea surface temperature; air temperature; ice concentration; fog presence; and precipitation. Results from the regression tree reveal that the RIR defined as (incident number per area-day)/(traffic amount per area-day) across grid cells with incidents, increases as the weather conditions deteriorate in a general way, and the concentration of ice has the biggest influence on the magnitude of incident rates for a given level of traffic exposure. The results from this analysis may assist administrators of maritime traffic, especially those associated with fishing activities, through a better understanding of the influence on RIR of certain weather conditions within given areas in specific time periods.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".