MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982037991 · doi:10.12681/mms.20671

An approximate assessment of the production levels of the Italian fishing fleet in the Mediterranean Sea during selected years in comparison with the analogous previous estimates

2020· article· en· W2982037991 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michele Romanelli

Bibliographic record

VenueMediterranean Marine Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscardsFishingFisheryMediterranean seaTonneGeographyMediterranean climateMarine fisheriesCommercial fishingEnvironmental scienceOceanographyBiologyGeologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the past two decades, the organization Sea Around Us (based at the Fisheries Centre in British Columbia, Canada) has been carrying out the relevant task of reconstructing national statistics on marine fisheries for almost all countries and territories to fill information gaps and correct the general trend of severe underestimation of the “true” level of catches, discards and landings.A recent reconstruction of this kind showed that the annual catches by the Italian fleet fishing in the Mediterranean Sea had been presumably underestimated during most of the 1950-2010; in the 1970-1995 sub-period, they would have ranged from 0.7-1.1 million metric tons per year. However, comparisons with the landings for the few years for which there are “independent” estimates (i.e., not based on official statistics) show that many more bivalve molluscs and fewer “small pelagics” were caught and that the highest annual outputs reported by Sea Around Us should be presumably cut by 25%-35%.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMediterranean Marine ScienceSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207