MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296120731 · doi:10.1002/env.2759

Spatiotemporal modeling of mature‐at‐length data using a sliding window approach

2022· article· en· W4296120731 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yuan Yan, Eva Cantoni, Chris Field, Margaret A. Treble, Joanna Mills Flemming

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmetrics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock assessmentFishingHalibutPopulationStatisticsSliding window protocolFisherySmall area estimationMixed modelGeographyGeneralized linear mixed modelEconometricsFish <Actinopterygii>BiologyMathematicsComputer scienceDemographyEstimatorWindow (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Assessing maturity status of fish and invertebrate species is important for understanding population dynamics with results (e.g., estimates of reproductive potential) often used to inform fisheries management strategies (e.g., the setting of minimum legal size requirements for fishing). Maturity rates may vary substantially across a population's range, as well as between years. In addition, maturity data are typically obtained from fisheries‐independent surveys that may be incomplete (or missing) from year to year. Here we propose a spatial generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) framework for maturity data that includes spatially correlated random effects to address variations in space, and a sliding window approach to deal with unbalanced maturity data in both space and time. We demonstrate, with both real data and a simulation study, that this combined approach results in unbiased estimates of important growth parameters. Results of using our spatial GLMM framework with Greenland halibut (Rheinhardtius hippoglossoides) mature‐at‐length data from surveys of the eastern Canadian Arctic show that females mature at a much larger size than do males. The length at which 50% of the stock is mature () is found to be higher in Baffin Bay compared to Davis Strait, and a declining trend in the in recent years is revealed for both sexes. Our proposed methodology extends far beyond our current application in being useful for analyzing unbalanced spatiotemporal data from an array of diverse scientific fields.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.046 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmetricsSame topicSpatial and Panel Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207