MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2156345479 · doi:10.5539/ass.v9n9p249

Identifying Problems among Seabass Brackish-Water Cage Entrepreneurs in Malaysia

2013· article· en· W2156345479 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khairuddin Idris, Hayrol Azril Mohamed Shaffril, Jeffrey Lawrence D’Silva, Norsida Man

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Bivalve and Aquaculture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAquacultureBrackish waterFisheryBusinessBass (fish)RecreationEnvironmental resource managementFish <Actinopterygii>Natural resource economicsEnvironmental planningEconomicsGeographyEcologyBiologySalinity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the strain on marine sources escalates, the aquaculture industry is becoming a viable alternative. Due to its potential to generate income for the community, interest in aquaculture is mounting. In line with this mounting interest, information with regards to the expected challenges within the industry serves as important preparation for future aquaculture entrepreneurs. Despite its importance, however, the availability of such data is lacking, and this study attempts to fill this gap by identifying the problems faced by the sea bass brackish-water cage entrepreneurs in Malaysia. The qualitative study uses in-depth interviews with aquaculture entrepreneurs who run sea bass rearing organizations at four different locations in Malaysia. Based on the analysis, four main themes are identified, namely financial, human factors, environmental and stakeholders. The ensuing discussion attempts to highlight points of interest for those who might venture into brackish-water cage aquaculture.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social Science→Same topicMarine Bivalve and Aquaculture Studies→French-language works237,207→