MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942825286 · doi:10.1111/fme.12346

The hidden value of artisanal fisheries in Honduras

2019· article· en· W2942825286 on OpenAlexaff
Steven W. J. Canty, Manuela Funes, Stephen J. Box, K. Zylich, Brittany Derrick, Esther Divovich, Alasdair Lindop, Daniel Pauly, Dirk Zeller

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries Management and Ecology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y TécnicasOak FoundationDavid and Lucile Packard Foundation
KeywordsFisheryFishingFisheries managementPaceArtisanal fishingMarine fisheriesBusinessValue (mathematics)Geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Declining fisheries catches are a global trend, with management failing to keep pace with growth in fishing effort and technological advances. The economic value of Honduras’ catches was estimated within the industrial and artisanal sectors. Catches were found to be 2.9 times greater than the official statistics between 1950 and 2015. The merging of industrial and artisanal catch data masked the decline in industrial catches and hid the strong growth of artisanal fisheries. In 1996, annual artisanal fisheries landed catches surpassed the industrial fishery sector, and in 2000, the annual net value of artisanal fisheries eclipsed the value of the industrial fisheries. These data highlight the importance of artisanal fisheries in Honduras and challenge the long‐held belief that the industrial sector contributes more to the national economy. The global paucity of fisheries data highlights the need for comprehensive strategies to collect more detailed and accurate fisheries data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFisheries Management and EcologySame topicCoral and Marine Ecosystems StudiesFrench-language works237,207