Advancing an Ecosystem Approach in the Gulf of Maine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<i>Abstract</i>.—The Gulf of Maine (GoM) may have defined borders to some, but to the Canadian fishing industry, it carries a flow of larvae, nutrients, and other resources that help sustain the fishery from Georges Bank to the West Scotian Slope to the Bay of Fundy and all points in between. The GoM provides a source of wealth to people and communities, as well as supplying what may be one of the last natural foods on the planet. The fishing industry has been using the GoM for centuries, yet it is only recently that monitoring and data gathering has been taking place. In my opinion, we can extract much more value from the fisheries than we presently do. If the fisheries resource of the GoM is not delivering its full potential, who is ultimately responsible and accountable? In the past decade, transboundary groundfish resources from Georges Bank have been successfully managed through the Transboundary Management Guidance Committee. We can improve decision making even further in a greater ecosystem context, recognizing that decisions have to be made with the information available. An ecosystem approach to fisheries proposes a pragmatic view based on assessing the risk of not meeting agreed objectives.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".