MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2363261994 · doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsw071

Food for thought: pretty good multispecies yield

2016· article· en· W2363261994 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Rindorf, Catherine M. Dichmont, Phillip S. Levin, Pamela M. Mace, Sean Pascoe, Raúl Prellezo, André E. Punt, David G. Reid, Robert L. Stephenson, Clara Ulrich, Morten Vinther, Lotte Worsøe Clausen

Bibliographic record

VenueICES Journal of Marine Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYield (engineering)Environmental scienceMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract MSY principles for marine fisheries management reflect a focus on obtaining continued high catches to provide food and livelihoods for humanity, while not compromising ecosystems. However, maintaining healthy stocks to provide the maximum sustainable yield on a single-species basis does not ensure that broader ecosystem, economic, and social objectives are addressed. We investigate how the principles of a “pretty good yield” range of fishing mortalities assumed to provide >95% of the average yield for a single stock can be expanded to a pretty good multispecies yield (PGMY) space and further to pretty good multidimensional yield to accommodate situations where the yield from a stock affects the ecosystem, economic and social benefits, or sustainability. We demonstrate in a European example that PGMY is a practical concept. As PGMY provides a safe operating space for management that adheres to the principles of MSY, it allows the consideration of other aspects to be included in operational management advice in both data-rich and data-limited situations. PGMY furthermore provides a way to integrate advice across stocks, avoiding clearly infeasible management combinations, and thereby hopefully increasing confidence in scientific advice.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.604
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations76
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICES Journal of Marine ScienceSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207