MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600017475 · doi:10.1111/conl.12363

Applying a New Ensemble Approach to Estimating Stock Status of Marine Fisheries around the World

2017· article· en· W2600017475 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew A. Rosenberg, Kristin M. Kleisner, Jamie C. Afflerbach, Sean C. Anderson, Mark Dickey‐Collas, Andrew B. Cooper, Michael J. Fogarty, Elizabeth A. Fulton, Nicolás L. Gutiérrez, Kimberly Hyde, Ernesto Jardim, Olaf P. Jensen, Trond Kristiansen, Catherine Longo, Carolina V. Minte‐Vera, Cóilín Minto, Iago Mosqueira, Giacomo Chato Osio, Daniel Ovando, Elizabeth R. Selig, James T. Thorson, Jessica C. Walsh, Yimin Ye

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersGordon and Betty Moore Foundation
KeywordsFisheryStock assessmentStock (firearms)Marine protected areaFisheries managementMarine fisheriesFish stockMarine reserveGeographyEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementFishingEcologyBiologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The exploitation status of marine fisheries stocks worldwide is of critical importance for food security, ecosystem conservation, and fishery sustainability. Applying a suite of data‐limited methods to global catch data, combined through an ensemble modeling approach, we provide quantitative estimates of exploitation status for 785 fish stocks. Fifty‐three percent (414 stocks) are below B MSY and of these, 265 are estimated to be below 80% of the B MSY level. While the 149 stocks above 80% of B MSY are conventionally considered “fully exploited,” stocks staying at this level for many years, forego substantial yield. Our results enable managers to consider more detailed information than simply a categorization of stocks as “fully” or “over” exploited. Our approach is reproducible, allows consistent application to a broad range of stocks, and can be easily updated as new data become available. Applied on an ongoing basis, this approach can provide critical, more detailed information for resource management for more exploited fish stocks than currently available.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations98
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservation LettersSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207