MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2096901501 · doi:10.1139/f2011-078

Prediction of biomass in Norwegian fish farms

2011· article· en· W2096901501 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anders Løland, Magne Aldrin, Gunnhildur H. Steinbakk, Ragnar Bang Huseby, Jon Arne Grøttum

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsStockingSalmoNorwegianFisheryFish stockEnvironmental scienceBiomass (ecology)Fish <Actinopterygii>Fish farmingStatisticsMathematicsEcologyAquacultureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have constructed a statistical model to forecast, with uncertainty, the stock of Norwegian farmed Atlantic salmon ( Salmo salar ). The model provided good predictions of future biomass of Norwegian farmed salmon and can also be used to perform “what-if” analysis exploring the impact of varying scenarios for stocking and slaughtering. The model is based on the number of fish in each mass class (0–1, 1–2, …, 10+ kg) and their average mass. The model, which is related to standard size-structured models, computes the number of fish growing into the next mass class the next month and the number of fish remaining in the same mass class. In addition, the number of new fish stocked, fish lost, slaughtered, and wasted, as well as the sea temperature related to the growth, were modelled. All the model parameters were estimated based on monthly data from 2002 to 2007, and the model was validated statistically. Any animal production involving cycles may benefit from this forecasting tool.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.164 · 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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→