MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956945081 · doi:10.1080/1059924x.2019.1639576

Marine Forecasting and Fishing Safety: Improving the Fit between Forecasts and Harvester Needs

2019· article· en· W2956945081 on OpenAlex
Joel Finnis, James Shewmake, Barb Neis, Devon Telford

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agromedicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Spill Detection and Mitigation
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersMitacsMarine Environmental Observation Prediction and Response Network
KeywordsFishingConsistency (knowledge bases)Production (economics)General partnershipExtreme weatherFisheryEnvironmental resource managementClimate changeEnvironmental scienceBusinessComputer scienceEconomicsEcologyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Weather is a key source of marine risk, but relationships between fishing activity, safety, and weather remain poorly understood. Critically, the fit between available marine forecast products, fish harvesters’ needs, and harvester’s decision-making processes has not been rigorously assessed. This paper addresses these gaps by documenting a) weather-related decision-making by harvesters, and its relationship to forecasts across multiple regions and fisheries on Canada’s East coast (Newfoundland) and b) the dynamics of forecast production priorities.Methods: A multi-disciplinary, community-engaged research approach, conducted in partnership with the Newfoundland and Labrador Fish Harvesting Safety Association (NL-FHSA). Data consist of semi-structured interviews with fish harvesters and weather forecasters, focused on marine forecast production and use.Results: Results emphasize that there is a subjective “art” to both production and use of marine forecasts. Forecasters and harvesters share several common values regarding forecasts, but different emphases: forecasters favor some combination of accuracy, consistency, and utility, while harvesters are largely concerned with utility. Finally, harvesters’ decision-making is based on nuanced and contextual interpretations of a few key hazards (winds and, to a lesser extent, waves).Conclusion: This community-engaged research has triggered experimentation with forecasts tailored to fisheries utility within Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC). It lays the groundwork for ongoing, mutually beneficial dialogue between forecasters and harvesters, engaging harvesters with the forecasting process while familiarizing forecasters with harvester’s decision-making processes. Ongoing industry partnerships (NL-FHSA) continue to sustain momentum from this study towards further enhancing the utility of future marine forecasts for small-scale harvesters.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.189 · 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