MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2998045344 · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-38081-6_7

Predicting Fishing Effort and Catch Using Semantic Trajectories and Machine Learning

2020· book-chapter· en· W2998045344 on OpenAlexafffund
Pedram Adibi, Fabio Pranovi, Alessandra Raffaetà, Elisabetta Russo, Claudio Silvestri, Marta Simeoni, Amílcar Soares, Stan Matwin

Bibliographic record

VenueLecture notes in computer science · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceFishingContext (archaeology)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceSet (abstract data type)Fisheries managementFisheryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we explore a unique, high-value spatio-temporal dataset that results from the fusion of three data sources: trajectories from fishing vessels (obtained from terrestrial Automatic Identification System, or AIS, data feed), the corresponding fish catch reports (i.e., the quantity and type of fish caught), and relevant environmental data. The result of that fusion is a set of semantic trajectories describing the fishing activities in Northern Adriatic Sea over two years. We present early results from an exploratory analysis of these semantic trajectories, as well as from initial predictive modeling using Machine Learning. Our goal is to predict the Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE), an indicator of the fishing resources exploitation useful for fisheries management. Our predictive results are preliminary in both the temporal data horizon that we are able to explore and in the limited set of learning techniques that are employed on this task. We discuss several approaches that we plan to apply in the near future to learn from such data, evidence, and knowledge that will be useful for fisheries management. It is likely that other centers of intense fishing activities are in possession of similar data and could use the methods similar to the ones proposed here in their local context.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLecture notes in computer science→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→