Bibliographic record
Abstract
International management of Fraser River sockeye salmon fisheries from 1946 to the present has evolved into a complex, week-to-week, in-season, decision-making process featuring a comprehensive data collection and analysis program designed to produce the information required for management action. Intensive catch monitoring, test fishing, racial analysis, and hydroacoustic programs are implemented each season. Analysis of catch, escapement, and biological information generates in-season updates of run size, arrival timing, and migration route by stock or stock group. The International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission regulated fisheries from 1946 to 1985 and, under the Pacific Salmon Treaty, the Fraser River Panel of the Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC) has regulated fisheries in Panel Area waters since 1986 (except 1992 and 1994) to harvest annual runs in a fashion that meets escapement objectives and achieves the required international allocation and domestic allocations of the available catch. The PSC’s monitoring programs provide the Panel with the ability to track the progress of escapement and catch objectives and to modify regulations in-season to achieve these objectives. The cooperative efforts of Canada and the U.S. in the rational management of the Fraser River sockeye salmon resource over a period of 50 years have resulted in the rebuilding of Fraser River sockeye stocks. The yield to all fisheries over the 8 years from 1987–1994 totals 81 million fish or just over 10 million per year.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.004 |
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".