MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W213329171 · doi:10.2166/wqrj.2002.012

Non-Lethal Sampling Methods for Assessing Environmental Impacts Using a Small-Bodied Sentinel Fish Species

2002· article· en· W213329171 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Michelle A. Gray, R. Allen Curry, Kelly R. Munkittrick

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Quality Research Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsSampling (signal processing)FisherySculpinFish <Actinopterygii>Environmental scienceEnvironmental monitoringEcologyEnvironmental resource managementBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Under the Canadian Fisheries Act, pulp and paper mills and metal mines must conduct a cyclical monitoring program for potential environmental effects that includes a fish survey. Study designs for the fish survey have been evolving over the past few years, and there has been increased emphasis on the use of small-bodied fish species. Increasing concerns about the potential impacts of sampling programs on the fish populations in smaller receiving waters have led us to develop non-lethal sampling methodologies that will satisfy the information requirements for the environmental effects monitoring program. This manuscript outlines the use of a non-lethal sampling program to collect information on age distributions, growth rates, reproductive performance and fish condition in populations of slimy sculpin inhabiting forested and agricultural sections of a small New Brunswick river.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.387
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.093 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations66
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Quality Research JournalSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207