MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220879884 · doi:10.1163/15718085-bja10085

Endangered Blue Whale Survival in the North Atlantic: Lagging Scientific and Governance Responses, Charting Future Courses

2022· article· en· W4220879884 on OpenAlexaffabout
Olga Koubrak, David VanderZwaag, Boris Worm

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhalingEndangered speciesLegislationGeographyFisheryPopulationFishingCorporate governancePolitical scienceEnvironmental planningBusinessLawBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Populations of blue whales were heavily depleted across the globe by industrial whaling and are still considered globally endangered today. In the Northwest Atlantic, an estimated 400–600 individuals remain, but these numbers are highly uncertain. Ship strikes, fishing gear entanglement, and marine debris are thought to be leading causes of contemporary human-caused mortality in blue whales, with anthropogenic noise possibly causing sublethal stress and injury. Climate change is recognised as an emerging and intensifying threat that is likely to affect food supply and could limit the capacity of the population to recover. Both Canada and the United States have protected blue whales through their domestic legislation. This article reviews law and policy responses in the two countries, as well as bilateral, regional and international frameworks that address anthropogenic threats to blue whales. Future scientific directions, as well as recommendations for improvements to domestic legislation and multilevel cooperation are outlined.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Marine and Coastal LawSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207