MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149550422 · doi:10.1016/j.icesjms.2005.01.011

Indicators for ecosystem-based management on the Scotian Shelf: bridging the gap between theory and practice

2005· article· en· W2149550422 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert O’Boyle, Michael Sinclair, Paul D. Keizer, Kiho Lee, D. Ricard, P. A. Yeats

Bibliographic record

VenueICES Journal of Marine Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of Oceanography
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental resource managementBridging (networking)Marine spatial planningManagement by objectivesSuiteBiodiversityConceptual frameworkEnvironmental scienceBusinessComputer scienceGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The need for a more integrated approach to ocean management is increasingly being recognized. Discussion on appropriate indicators and reference points supporting such an approach has focused on the technical merits of one set of metrics over another in servicing some management goal. Relatively little effort has been put into answering the question how one would use suites of indicators to meet the multiple conservation objectives defined in operational plans. Such an exercise is being undertaken on the eastern Scotian Shelf off Canada's east coast, as a national integrated management pilot. A number of ocean industries – fishing, oil and gas exploration, transport, and the military – utilize the area, a typical situation elsewhere in the world. A suite of conceptual ecosystem-level objectives has been identified to address biodiversity, productivity, and habitat issues. Operational objectives, which identify an indicator and reference points associated with each conceptual objective, are then stated. Utilizing this framework, individual ocean industry plans and activities can be reviewed in a consistent manner, to determine how they might be constrained by the conservation objectives for the area. Issues of spatial scale and cumulative impacts are addressed, and comment is made on future developments.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations23
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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