MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312410096 · doi:10.1139/facets-2021-0061

A novel morphometry-based method for assessing maturity in male Tanner crab,<i> Chionoecetes bairdi</i>

2022· article· en· W4312410096 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jonathan I. Richar, Robert J. Foy

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsChelaCarapaceMaturity (psychological)PopulationSexual maturityBiologyFisheryStatisticsMetric (unit)MathematicsEcologyDemographyCrustaceanEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate classification of maturity status and estimation of size at 50% maturity for male crabs are important to the management of North Pacific crab stocks, which form the basis of several economically valuable fisheries. We demonstrate a straightforward maturity classification approach applied to male Tanner crabs ( Chionoecetes bairdi), based on the use of log-transformed chela height distributions calculated via kernel density functions. The linear equation defining the relationship between the minima of these chela height distributions, and the midpoint of the corresponding carapace width bins is then used to estimate the incidence of maturity by size group across the population. We demonstrate the performance of this approach relative to two other currently applied methodologies. Finally, we apply this method to assess annual size at 50% maturity in eastern Bering Sea male Tanner crabs, and spatiotemporal trends in this parameter. We demonstrate the existence of high interannual and spatial variability in this population metric and find evidence of a decline in size at maturity in the western stock.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207