MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2485263122 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2016-0020

Improving assessment of <i>Pandalus</i> stocks using a seasonal, size-structured assessment model with environmental variables. Part I: Model description and application

2016· article· en· W2485263122 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jie Cao, Yong Chen, R. A. Richards

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAtlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission
KeywordsStock assessmentStock (firearms)FishingFisheryPopulation modelEnvironmental sciencePopulationGeneralized additive modelEconometricsContext (archaeology)EcologyGeographyStatisticsBiologyMathematicsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pandalus species display the following features that make it difficult to apply traditional age-based stock assessment models: (i) difficulty of determining age in the absence of hard parts retained through the molt; (ii) sex change in which individuals mature first as males and then transform to females; and (iii) potentially strong influence of environmental conditions on recruitment population dynamics. In this context, we propose a seasonal, size-structured assessment model dedicated to stock assessment of hermaphroditic Pandalidae. The modeling framework incorporates a submodel for changes of length at sex transformation and functions to incorporate environmental effects on recruitment dynamics. The model can be directly fitted to length-structured data, overcoming the length to age conversion problem. The model has a seasonal time step that allows it to account for seasonal variations in biological processes and fishing patterns. The model provides stock assessment outputs, such as fishing mortality and stock biomass estimates, and sex-specific abundance-at-length. The model is applied to the exploited shrimp stock of Pandalus borealis in the Gulf of Maine as an example of its utility. The model proposed in this study is flexible and generic and can be applied to many other exploited stocks.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations21
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→