MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141388399 · doi:10.1016/j.icesjms.2004.08.009

Performance of precautionary reference points in providing management advice on North Sea fish stocks

2004· article· en· W2141388399 on OpenAlexaff
G.J. Piet, Jake Rice

Bibliographic record

VenueICES Journal of Marine Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFishingStatus quoStock (firearms)Stock assessmentFisheryAdvice (programming)Fish stockPrecautionary principleEnvironmental scienceFisheries managementEnvironmental resource managementBusinessActuarial scienceComputer scienceGeographyEcologyEconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For 17 stocks in the North Sea, the performance and effectiveness of management advice using precautionary reference points was evaluated. Three criteria were used to identify whether a stock was within safe biological limits: SSB < Bpa, F > Fpa, or SSB < Bpa and F > Fpa. Four scenarios were considered, comparing the advice in the assessment year with what is retrospectively (2002 assessment) known to be the status of the stock at that time: (1) stock outside safe biological limits, advice to reduce fishing; (2) stock outside safe biological limits, advice for status quo harvesting; (3) stock within safe biological limits, advice to reduce fishing; and (4) stock within safe biological limits, advice for status quo (or increased) harvesting. Signal Detection Theory was applied to these scenarios, and the proportion of Hits (1 and 4), Misses (2), and False Alarms (3) were determined for each year as the proportion of the stocks for which the respective scenarios applied. Using both Bpa and Fpa was deemed the approach with the lowest error rate, and it resulted in about the same proportion of Hits in management advice as when Bpa alone was used (62%), but the proportion of Misses was slightly lower (24% vs. 26%). Therefore, the suggested EcoQ element would be the proportion of commercial fish stocks within safe biological limits (i.e. SSB > Bpa, F < Fpa), and the Ecological Quality Objective (EcoQO) should be that this EcoQ should be at or above a desired level. This desired level is a societal/political decision relative to the EcoQ reference level (i.e. where the anthropogenic influence on the ecological system is minimal), which by definition is 100%. At present, probably <10% of North Sea fish stocks are within safe biological limits, despite the relatively high Hit rate of >60%. A possible explanation is that most of these stocks (e.g. flatfish and roundfish) are caught in a mixed fishery, for which TAC management is less effective.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.112
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.112
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 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

Citations50
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICES Journal of Marine ScienceSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207