MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2438999946

Back to the Future in Northern British Columbia: Evaluating Historic Marine Ecosystems and Optimal Restorable Biomass as Restoration Goals for the Future

2008· other· en· W2438999946 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida) · 2008
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementFishingRestoration ecologyBiodiversityEcosystem servicesBiomass (ecology)Marine ecosystemEnvironmental scienceFisheryEcologyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Where previous work identified candidate whole-ecosystem goals for restoration in Northern British Columbia, this study develops a new technique to achieve those goals. The optimal fishing pattern to bring about recovery is determined through simulation, so that the fisheries modify the current ecosystem over time into one that more closely resembles an ideal ecosystem state based on historic conditions. This study introduces a new conceptual restoration target, a set of optimal restorable biomasses (ORB): a whole-ecosystem analogy to B MSY . A number of restoration plans are drafted, drastic (requiring large reductions in harvest from current levels) to moderate (minor reductions). Plans are evaluated using cost-benefit analysis. Socioeconomic and ecological benefits of each plan are described; a convex relationship between fishery profit and ecosystem biodiversity suggests that there may be an optimal rate of restoration.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.182 · 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