Spatial surplus production modeling of Atlantic tunas and billfish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We formulate and simulation-test a spatial surplus production model that provides a basis with which to undertake multispecies, multi-area, stock assessment. Movement between areas is parameterized using a simple gravity model that includes a "residency" parameter that determines the degree of stock mixing among areas. The model is deliberately simple in order to (1) accommodate nontarget species that typically have fewer available data and (2) minimize computational demand to enable simulation evaluation of spatial management strategies. Using this model, we demonstrate that careful consideration of spatial catch and effort data can provide the basis for simple yet reliable spatial stock assessments. If simple spatial dynamics can be assumed, tagging data are not required to reliably estimate spatial distribution and movement. When applied to eight stocks of Atlantic tuna and billfish, the model tracks regional catch data relatively well by approximating local depletions and exchange among high-abundance areas. We use these results to investigate and discuss the implications of using spatially aggregated stock assessment for fisheries in which the distribution of both the population and fishing vary over time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".