MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390950263 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3870664/v1

A Two-Eyed Seeing approach to describe Gumegwsis (Cyclopterus lumpus) ecology and fisheries interactions in the inner Mawipoqtapei (Chaleur Bay), Canada

2024· preprint· en· W4390950263 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M’sɨt No’gmaq, Ugpi’ganjig, Carole‐Anne Gillis, Billie Chiasson, Catherine Gagnon, Pascale Gosselin, Lloyd Arsenault, John Murvin Vicaire

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayFisheryEcologyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The integration of diverse knowledge systems, encompassing Indigenous, local, and Western perspectives, is gaining traction in Canadian scientific research for coastal areas and fisheries. Despite proven successes, skepticism persists among scientists and decision-makers, leading to ineffective recovery measures for endangered aquatic species. Responding to concerns from Mi’gmaw fishers in Ugpi’ganjiq, the Gespe’gewa’gi Institute of Natural Understanding (GINU) initiated a collaborative project focused on the threatened Gumegwsis (Common lumpfish) in Chaleur Bay, Eastern Canada. Employing a Two-eyed seeing approach, the study combined interviews, mapping, and temperature monitoring, uncovering Gumegwsis life history, its significance to local fishers, behavioral changes, and critical spawning and nursery habitats. In contrast to prior assessments, which dismissed ceremonial and Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge (ATK) uses, our study highlighted the unique insights of Mi’gmaw fishers, emphasizing the importance of embracing diverse knowledge for species ecology and habitat understanding. This underscores the need for collaborative species recovery strategies, advocating for the co-creation of solutions and fostering cooperation in fisheries research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→