Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 3rd Annual North American Sturgeon conference was held in Bozeman, Montana on August 31-September 2, 2010 at the Chico Hot Springs Resort.The meeting was hosted by the North American Chapter (NAC) of the World Sturgeon Conservation Society (WSCS) and represents the first time the meeting was held independent of other meetings.The inaugural meeting was hosted as a symposium at the American Fisheries Society (AFS) Meeting in Ottawa, Canada in 2008, followed by the a symposium held in conjunction with the AFS meeting in Nashville in 2009.This yearÕs conference started with two at capacity workshops on Sturgeon Conservation Genetics and Sturgeon Age Estimation and Tagging Technique held at the Bozeman Fish Technology Center.This provided an excellent opportunity for participants to get Ôhands onÕ experience and have in depth discussions on pertinent topics with leaders on the field.The remainder of the conference was set at Chico Hot Springs Resort in Pray, Montana and was attended by 140 people.There were 40 oral presentations provided on the nine North American sturgeon species ranging from results of telemetry studies, genetic analysis to population dynamic studies.Presentations were from seasoned professionals to graduate students, who had an invaluable experience presenting their studies at an international conference.The accompanying proceeding represents a selection of the presentations provided at this conference.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.566 | 0.371 |
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".