Evaluation of performance of alternative management models of Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) in the presence of climatic change and outcome uncertainty using Monte Carlo simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An important management challenge is to maintain productive populations of Pacific salmon ( Oncorhynchus spp.), despite highly variable environments and our weak understanding of future climatic conditions and mechanisms that link them to salmon. This understanding could be improved by including environmental covariates in salmon population models and applying advanced “meta-analyses” to large data sets to better estimate underlying functional relationships. However, the performance of such models needs to be determined in the context of an overall system. We therefore simulated a 15-population salmon fishery system and compared the performance (in terms of catch and an index of conservation concern) of 10 forecasting and stock assessment models, ranging from simple to complex, by stochastically simulating components of a salmon fishery using a “closed-loop simulation” (or “management strategy evaluation”) under a variety of plausible future climatic scenarios. We found that complex models perform better in some situations. However, their incremental benefits are small and are swamped by the large variability in outcomes of management actions caused by “outcome uncertainty”, which reflects noncompliance of fishing vessels with regulations as well as variation in catchability. Reduction of this outcome uncertainty should therefore be a top priority, as should evaluations of more complex stock assessment models before adopting them.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".