Estimating stock status from relative abundance and resilience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Law of the Sea and regional and national laws and agreements require exploited populations or stocks to be managed so that they can produce maximum sustainable yields. However, exploitation level and stock status are unknown for most stocks because the data required for full stock assessments are missing. This study presents a new method [abundance maximum sustainable yields (AMSY)] that estimates relative population size when no catch data are available using time series of catch-per-unit-effort or other relative abundance indices as the main input. AMSY predictions for relative stock size were not significantly different from the “true” values when compared with simulated data. Also, they were not significantly different from relative stock size estimated by data-rich models in 88% of the comparisons within 140 real stocks. Application of AMSY to 38 data-poor stocks showed the suitability of the method and led to the first assessments for 23 species. Given the lack of catch data as input, AMSY estimates of exploitation come with wide margins of uncertainty, which may not be suitable for management. However, AMSY seems to be well suited for estimating productivity as well as relative stock size and may, therefore, aid in the management of data-poor stocks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".