MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Visualisation of standardized life‐history patterns

2001· article· en· W2117743805 on OpenAlexafffund
Dirk Zeller, Daniel Pauly

Bibliographic record

VenueFish and Fisheries · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaPew Charitable Trusts
KeywordsPelagic zoneLife history theoryDemersal zoneFisheryMarine lifeLife historyCoral reefGeographyEcosystemRange (aeronautics)EcologyEnvironmental scienceOceanographyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The life‐history patterns of fish and invertebrate species are complex. But much of this complexity can be captured in simple diagrams of coastal transects, where juveniles usually occur in larger numbers in shallow waters, while adults generally inhabit deeper, offshore waters. Iconographic representations of generalized life‐history patterns and depth profiles, with specific key life‐history parameters can capture much of these standardized patterns, including spawning areas, nursery/juvenile distributions, adult distributions and spawning migrations. Several examples presented here from a wide range of habitats and ecosystems (temperate and tropical waters, demersal, deep water, pelagic and coral reefs), including an example of different stocks of the same species, illustrate some general patterns with regard to water depth and distance from shore. The present approach should be viewed as a first step towards obtaining standardized patterns about key life‐history parameters, and will hopefully lead to incorporation into management of life‐history interconnectivity between different fishery sectors or gears. This may contribute to sustainable, ecosystem‐based approaches to management by informing policy options when faced with decisions to rationalize overcapitalized fisheries.

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)0.000
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 score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations12
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFish and FisheriesSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207