MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114991692 · doi:10.1071/mf04127

Use of otolith weight in length-mediated estimation of proportions at age

2005· article· en· W2114991692 on OpenAlexaff
R. I. C. C. Francis, Shelton J. Harley, Steven E. Campana, Peer Doering‐Arjes

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine and Freshwater Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of Oceanography
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOtolithBiologyStock assessmentFish <Actinopterygii>StatisticsEstimationFish stockSample (material)Sample size determinationFisheryMaximum likelihoodMathematicsFishingEconomicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Each year almost a million fish are aged from otoliths, primarily to estimate proportions at age for use in stock assessments. The preparation and reading of otoliths is time-consuming and thus expensive. Two techniques have been proposed to reduce costs. The first is length-mediated estimation, in which the length distribution from a large sample of fish is converted to an age distribution, using information (usually in the form of an age–length key) from a smaller sample containing length and age data. The second is to infer age from otolith weight (and/or other otolith measurements). These two cost-saving ideas are combined in a new method, length-mediated mixture analysis. It requires three samples – one with lengths only, one with lengths and otolith measurements, and one with lengths, otolith measurements and ages – and estimation is by maximum likelihood. The use of this method, which can be thought of as a generalisation of three established methods of age inference, is illustrated in two simulation experiments in a cost-benefit framework.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations30
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine and Freshwater ResearchSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207