MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150186167 · doi:10.1139/f03-030

Dynamic factor analysis to estimate common trends in fisheries time series

2003· article· en· W2150186167 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alain F. Zuur, Ian Tuck, N. Bailey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Aberdeen
KeywordsSeries (stratigraphy)Dynamic factorNephrops norvegicusTime seriesEconometric analysisNorth Atlantic oscillationEconometricsCatch per unit effortStatisticsFisheryEnvironmental scienceGeographyClimatologyMathematicsFishingMeteorologyBiologyGeologyDecapoda

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamic factor analysis (DFA) is a technique used to detect common patterns in a set of time series and relationships between these series and explanatory variables. Although DFA is used widely in econometric and psychological fields, it has not been used in fisheries and aquatic sciences to the best of our knowledge. To make the technique more widely accessible, an introductory guide for DFA, at an intermediate level, is presented in this paper. A case study is presented. The analysis of 13 landings-per-unit-effort series for Nephrops around northern Europe identified three common trends for 12 of the series, with one series being poorly fitted, but no relationships with the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) or sea surface temperature were found. The 12 series could be divided into six groups based on factor loadings from the three trends.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0110.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.249
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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations303
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207