Biological reference points for invertebrate fisheries: introduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of applying the precautionary approach to fisheries management, much of the current attention on developing reference points has been focussed on finfish species. However, at present the largest marine fisheries in Canada in terms of landings and value are those for invertebrate species. A workshop on reference points for invertebrate fisheries was held in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, from 2 to 5 December 2002 to address the particular needs of fisheries on this diverse group of species. Seven of the papers presented at that workshop were published as a group in this issue of the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science. Reproduction and recruitment were identified by all of these papers as key elements of population resilience and productivity that needed to be monitored in some way. The monitoring of reproductive capacity should be extended to aspects important in the mating systems, such as local densities, spatial patterns of agesize structure, and spatial and temporal patterns of breeding areas for broadcast spawners with poorly mobile or sessile adults. Similarly, such monitoring would also include female and male size and the number of female reproductive opportunities for crustacean species with copulating adults.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.007 |
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".