New developments in the analysis of catch time series as the basis for fish stock assessments: The CMSY++ method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following an introduction to the nature of fisheries catches and their information content, a new development of CMSY, a data-limited stock assessment method for fishes and invertebrates, is presented. This new version, CMSY++, overcomes several of the deficiencies of CMSY, which itself improved upon the “Catch-MSY” method published by S. Martell and R. Froese in 2013. The catch-only application of CMSY++ uses a Bayesian implementation of a modified Schaefer model, which also allows the fitting of abundance indices should such information be available. In the absence of historical catch time series and abundance indices, CMSY++ depends strongly on the provision of appropriate and informative priors for plausible ranges of initial and final stock depletion. An Artificial Neural Network (ANN) now assists in selecting objective priors for relative stock size based on patterns in 400 catch time series used for training. Regarding the cross-validation of the ANN predictions, of the 400 real stocks used in the training of ANN, 94% of final relative biomass ( B / k ) Bayesian (BSM) estimates were within the approximate 95% confidence limits of the respective CMSY++ estimate. Also, the equilibrium catch-biomass relations of the modified Schaefer model are compared with those of alternative surplus-production and age-structured models, suggesting that the latter two can be strongly biased towards underestimating the biomass required to sustain catches at low abundance. Numerous independent applications demonstrate how CMSY++ can incorporate, in addition to the required catch time series, both abundance data and a wide variety of ancillary information. We stress, however, the caveats and pitfalls of naively using the built-in prior options, which should instead be evaluated case-by-case and ideally be replaced by independent prior knowledge.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".