INPEX-led Ichthys Joint Venture – developing a dynamic adjustment area to identify, time, duration and potential exposure periods related to a 2D seismic survey offshore Western Australia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The oil and gas industry is striving for effective consultation between titleholders and commercial fishing stakeholders. Recent developments in cross-industry consultation have resulted in frameworks to provide an adjustment (compensation) claim process, where short-term displacement of fishers and reduction of catch coincident and following marine seismic survey activities may occur. 3D seismic surveys are undertaken more intensively, in geographically smaller areas and shorter time periods. This allows for discreet areas and periods to be defined for the applicability of a claim when fishing catch rates or displacement may occur. By contrast, 2D seismic surveys can be undertaken at regional scales with long sail line transects. These result in a survey vessel being active in an area of potential acoustic influence for infrequent and short periods of time, thus making justification for claims, for loss of catch or displacement, over the full survey area and full acquisition period challenging. To address this challenge a novel approach was developed to determine a dynamic area, based on where and when a survey vessel was operating the seismic source. INPEX utilised the 10 nautical miles (nm) × 10 nm geospatial grid data set provided by Department of Primary Industries Resources and Development, for commercial fishers to report catch effort. The methodology used modified navigation files, to determine the frequency, duration and number of times a fishing block was intersected during the survey. The resulting data provided an ‘adjustment area’ and ‘exposure date’ which could then be referred to as a basis for claim.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".