MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343949613 · doi:10.1111/jfb.12943

Using genetic inference to re‐evaluate the minimum longevity of the lemon shark <i>Negaprion brevirostris</i>

2016· article· en· W2343949613 on OpenAlexaff
Jill L. Brooks, Tristan L. Guttridge, Bryan R. Franks, R. Dean Grubbs, Demian D. Chapman, Samuel H. Gruber, Joseph D. DiBattista, Kevin A. Feldheim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersSave Our Seas FoundationGuy Harvey Ocean FoundationPew Charitable Trusts
KeywordsLongevityBiologyLife spanInferenceVulnerability (computing)StatisticsZoologyEvolutionary biologyMathematicsGeneticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A combination of mark-recapture and genetic sampling was used to extend the minimum longevity of an elasmobranch species and the life span estimate of the lemon shark Negaprion brevirostris was increased conservatively from 20·2 to 37 years. This increase in longevity means higher vulnerability and a longer recovery time from exploitation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicIchthyology and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207