MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4239977331 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14664195

Incorporating cumulative environmental effects of finfish mariculture into Canadian environmental assessment

2021· preprint· en· W4239977331 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah Coldwell King

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaricultureEnvironmental scienceEcosystemCumulative effectsEnvironmental impact assessmentMarine ecosystemSite selectionEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental resource managementFisheryEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>AquacultureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Traffic Light Decision Support System (DSS) used in marine finfish federal environmental assessments was expanded to include regional and cumulative environmental impacts. A retrospective review of 23 existing mariculture farms in southwestern New Brunswick indicated whether cumulative interactions would have justified site approvals. Six new criteria were added to the far-field component and other existing criteria were amended. Scores of A, B+, B⁻, C and pre-emptive C were based on acceptability criteria. Calculations of cumulative ecosystem indices and potential site indices revealed site acceptability, and the index combinations suggested potential site approvals predicted using Hargrave's (2002) three-colour Traffic Light scheme. Before mitigation was considered, 19 of 23 sites failed the amended set of criteria and after considering mitigation, 8 sites failed. Combining the site and ecosystem indices yielded varying site acceptability scores. The role of mitigation and other factors in hindering sustainable siting was discussed

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments→French-language works237,207→