Chapter 35. Extent of Assessment of Marine Biological Diversity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter provides a summary of currently assessed marine biodiversity in terms ofits coverage for the most conspicuous and well known taxonomic groups, particularecosystems, and large geographic regions. Assessments will be focused on theevaluation of the state of knowledge of marine biodiversity; however, for some groups,such evaluations are provided indirectly by studies aimed to establish threat and or riskstatus. The groups that have been summarized globally are the sea mammals (cetaceansand pinnipeds), seabirds, sea turtles, sharks, tunas, billfish, corals, and plankton. Thespecial ecosystems are seamounts, vents, and seeps. Regional summaries of coverage ofassessments are provided whenever possible for large basins, such as North Atlantic,South Atlantic, North Pacific, South Pacific, Indian Ocean, Arctic Ocean, and SouthernOcean. However, in some cases, information is compiled by countries (e.g., Canada)when these have more than one basin, or by large continents (e.g., South America)which share a history of surveys and exploration. After each of the sections, a globalanalysis of the status of knowledge of marine biodiversity is summarized within a fewsynthesis graphs. About 40 scientists contributed to this effort, each within their area ofexpertise and specified for each subsection. Supplementary material providing a list ofassessments with date, special area, habitat, taxonomic groups, and web informationhas also been compiled for a few of the regions (Caribbean, Europe, Gulf of Mexico, theSouthern Ocean and Sub-Saharan Africa) and States (China, India and Japan), as well asfor vents and seeps ecosystems and for turtles (Appendix I). In addition, a completereference list for further reading for each of the taxonomic groups and regions isprovided (Appendix II).
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.047 | 0.015 |
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".