MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2801550153 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2017-0435

Using multivariate state-space models to examine commercial stocks of redfish (<i>Sebastes</i> spp.) on the Flemish Cap

2018· article· en· W2801550153 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Adriana Nogueira, Nick Tolimieri, D.M. González-Troncoso

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersXunta de GaliciaUniversidade de Vigo
KeywordsSebastesFisheryMultivariate statisticsBiologyStock (firearms)FlemishPredationEcologyGeographyStatisticsFish <Actinopterygii>Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are three different species of redfish (Sebastes spp.) in the waters of the Flemish Cap (Division 3M, NAFO Regulatory Area): S. fasciatus, S. mentella, and S. norvegicus. Historically, S. fasciatus and S. mentella have been managed together as a single stock because of similar biology and difficulty in species identification. Here we use multivariate autoregressive state-space models to examine the abundance trajectories of the three species and to determine whether they can be treated as a single stock for management purposes or whether they should be treaty separately. We also included covariates to evaluate relationships with climate, commercial catch, and the abundance of predators and (or) competitors and prey. We did two separate analyses: (i) a single-period analysis over the full time series and (ii) a blocked, two-period analysis over different regulatory periods. In both analyses, the best-fit model included separate trajectories for each species at each depth but one overall stock growth rate; both also included commercial catches as a covariate. These analyses suggest that a single assessment for the Sebastes complex is acceptable.

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)0.005
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 score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.274
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
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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