Using autonomous video to estimate the bottom-contact area of longline trap gear and presence–absence of sensitive benthic habitat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bottom longline hook and trap fishing gear can potentially damage sensitive benthic areas (SBAs) in the ocean; however, the large-scale risks to these habitats are poorly understood because of the difficulties in mapping SBAs and in measuring the bottom-contact area of longline gear. In this paper, we describe a collaborative academic–industry–government approach to obtaining direct presence–absence data for SBAs and to measuring gear interactions with seafloor habitats via a novel deepwater trap camera and motion-sensing systems on commercial longline traps for sablefish (Anoplopoma fimbria) within SGaan Kinghlas – Bowie Seamount Marine Protected Area. We obtained direct presence–absence observations of cold-water corals (Alcyonacea, Antipatharia, Pennatulacea, Stylasteridae) and sponges (Hexactinellida, Demospongiae) at 92 locations over three commercial fishing trips. Video, accelerometer, and depth sensor data were used to estimate a mean bottom footprint of 53 m2 for a standard sablefish trap, which translates to 3200 m2 (95% CI = 2400–3900 m2) for a 60-trap commercial sablefish longline set. Our successful collaboration demonstrates how research partnerships with commercial fisheries have potential for massive improvements in the quantity and quality of data needed for conducting SBA risk assessments over large spatial and temporal scales.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".