MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507174355 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2015-0303

A stepwise stochastic simulation approach to estimate life history parameters for data-poor fisheries

2016· article· en· W2507174355 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marc O. Nadon, Jerald S. Ault

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock assessmentLife historyStock (firearms)Multivariate statisticsFisheryFish stockLife history theoryFisheries managementEconometricsProbability distributionStatisticsEnvironmental scienceEcologyGeographyFish <Actinopterygii>FishingBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coastal fisheries are typically characterized by species-rich catch compositions and limited management resources, which typically leads to notably data-poor situations for stock assessment. Some parsimonious stock assessment approaches rely on cost-efficient size composition data, but these also require estimates of life history parameters associated with natural mortality, growth, and maturity. These parameters are unavailable for most exploited stocks. Here, we present a novel approach that uses a local estimate of maximum length and statistical relationships between key life history parameters to build multivariate probability distributions that can be used to parameterize stock assessment models in the absence of species-specific life history data. We tested this approach on three fish species for which empirical length-at-age and maturity data were available (from Hawaii and Guam) and calculated probability distributions of spawning potential ratios (SPR) at different exploitation rates. The life history parameter and SPR probability distributions generated from our data-limited analytical approach compared well with those obtained from bootstrap analyses of the empirical life history data. This work provides a useful new tool that can greatly assist fishery stock assessment scientists and managers in data-poor situations, typical of most of the world’s fisheries.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.196 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations46
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207