MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3008277682 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2019-0152

Estimating the biomass of a mixed species complex using hydroacoustics and catch data from the Bay of Fundy and Scotian Shelf summer ecosystem survey

2020· article· en· W3008277682 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Allan Debertin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroundfishFisheryGadusPollockAnchovySpiny dogfishHaddockClupeaOceanographyAtlantic herringBiomass (ecology)HerringBaySebastesEnvironmental scienceFisheries managementFishingBiologyGeologyFish <Actinopterygii>Squalus acanthias

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An acoustic-based index of biomass was developed due to concerns that the existing bottom-trawl index for western component pollock (Pollachius virens) was inaccurate and imprecise. Acoustic data were recorded during annual summer ecosystem surveys. Pollock and other common groundfish could not be readily identified from echo-traces within echograms. Survey catch data were analyzed concurrently with acoustic data to estimate biomass from echo-integrals contributed by the six most commonly caught fish species: pollock, Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua), haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus), redfish (Sebastes fasciatus), Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus), and spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias). A cluster analyses that used a Bayesian conditional probability classified homogeneous regions based on species composition. Species composition, nautical area scatter coefficient, and backscattering cross-section of fishes for regions were used to calculate the biomass of fishes. Acoustic indices were considered as appropriate as bottom-trawl indices for fisheries management advice because the bias and variance were similar between the indices when analyzed using repeated K-fold cross-validation.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.108 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→