Comparing predictions of fisheries bycatch using multiple spatiotemporal species distribution model frameworks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spatiotemporal predictions of bycatch (i.e., catch of nontargeted species) have shown promise as dynamic ocean management tools for reducing bycatch. However, which spatiotemporal model framework to use for generating these predictions is unclear. We evaluated a relatively new method, Gaussian Markov random fields (GMRFs), with two other frameworks, generalized additive models (GAMs) and random forests. We fit geostatistical delta-models to fisheries observer bycatch data for six species with a broad range of movement patterns (e.g., highly migratory sea turtles versus sedentary rockfish) and bycatch rates (percentage of observations with nonzero catch, 0.3%–96.2%). Random forests had better interpolation performance than the GMRF and GAM models for all six species, but random forests performance was more sensitive when predicting data at the edge of the fishery (i.e., spatial extrapolation). Using random forests to identify and remove the 5% highest bycatch risk fishing events reduced the bycatch-to-target species catch ratio by 34% on average. All models considerably reduced the bycatch-to-target ratio, demonstrating the clear potential of species distribution models to support spatial fishery management.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it