MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098879989 · doi:10.1109/icsmc.1994.399831

Design of an automated fish marking machine

2002· article· en· W2098879989 on OpenAlexaff
C.W. De Silva, C. Dong, Raymond G. Gosine, Jin‐Shu Yang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHatcheryFish <Actinopterygii>Unit (ring theory)Identification (biology)FisheryComputer scienceFish hatcheryProcess (computing)Fish farmingAquacultureBiologyEcologyOperating systemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marking of juvenile fish in hatcheries, before releasing into lakes and rivers, is an activity that is very valuable in fishery management. Samples of grown fish could be subsequently harvested and examined to collect data, that would be useful for many purposes such as predicting fish stocks, determining migration patterns of fish, and ascertaining the survival ratio of hatchery fish. A simple presence/absence type mark can be applied fast and may provide a straightforward identification means for hatchery fish. This paper presents the design development process of an automated machine for spray marking of fish. The machine consists of three main modules: the feeding unit; the conveying unit; the spray marking unit; and the pigment recirculation unit. The paper will present the development and integration of these modules.>

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Quality Monitoring TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207