Science behind management of Shark Bay and Florida Bay, two P-limited subtropical systems with different climatology and human pressures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This special issue on ‘Science for the management of subtropical embayments: examples from Shark Bay and Florida Bay’ is a valuable compilation of individual research outcomes from Florida Bay and Shark Bay from the past decade and addresses gaps in our scientific knowledge base in Shark Bay especially. Yet the compilation also demonstrates excellent research that is poorly integrated, and driven by interests and issues that do not necessarily lead to a more integrated stewardship of the marine natural values of either Shark Bay or Florida Bay. Here we describe the status of our current knowledge, introduce the valuable extension of the current knowledge through the papers in this issue and then suggest some future directions. For management, there is a need for a multidisciplinary international science program that focusses research on the ecological resilience of Shark Bay and Florida Bay, the effect of interactions between physical environmental drivers and biological control through behavioural and trophic interactions, and all under increased anthropogenic stressors. Shark Bay offers a ‘pristine template’ for this scale of study.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".