Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract:\nRiver herring (alewife and blueback herring) are anadromous alosines that play important ecological roles and historically comprised major U.S. fisheries. Stocks are at historically low levels Atlantic coast-wide, which lead to a status review to determine if listing as Threatened species was warranted. In August 2013 National Marine Fisheries Service declined to list the species, but initiated a coastwide conservation planning process to fill some of the research gaps, address uncertainty in the data, and revisit the status of both species with new information. The Plan will identify important conservation efforts that can be implemented to help restore river herring throughout their entire range from Canada to Florida, track the implementation of these efforts, identify research needed to fill in critical data gaps, and monitor the progress of restoring these important species. Interdisciplinary working groups focused on habitat, climate change, fisheries management, genetics, stock status, species interactions, and ecosystem integration. This session will explore the findings to date of the Habitat working group including threats, strategies, research priorities, and current cooperative research related to habitat drivers of river herring status such as connectivity, landuse, water quality and water quantity. Since river herring occupy a wide range of ecosystems along the entire East Coast of North America, identifying and addressing significant threats to river herring may provide important benefits to other diadromous and riverine species.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.075 | 0.012 |
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".