MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390964653 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2023-0219

A novel statistical approach to deal with spatial bias in maturity ogive estimation

2024· article· en· W4390964653 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marta Cousido‐Rocha, Francisco Izquierdo, Joaquín Martínez‐Minaya, María Grazia Pennino, Hugo Mendes, Cristina Silva, Andreia V. Silva, María Saínza, Santiago Cerviño

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAxencia Galega de InnovaciónAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónXunta de GaliciaGeneralitat Valenciana
KeywordsEstimationEconometricsComputer scienceMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The proportion of mature fish at length is one of the most important population attributes when evaluating reproductive potential for fish stock assessment purposes. Bias in maturity ogive parameters can lead to fishery management decisions based on misspecified biological reference points. These parameters can vary spatially and temporally, and this variability should be understood and included in the assessment models. However, integrating this variability becomes challenging when specific spatial-dependent ogives cannot be used in the stock assessment model. Hence, this study proposes a novel use of a multivariate response Bayesian regression model, employing an integrated nested Laplace approximation to estimate a single global maturity ogive using data from various spatial areas. This model explicitly accounts for differences in the sampling process and combines information from different areas to estimate shared maturity ogive parameters using joint-likelihood procedures. The model is applied to the European hake stock in ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea) Divisions 27.8.c and 27.9.a, serving as a practical guide. In this model, we have considered different predictors to handle the relationship between the probability of being mature and the length and year covariates. Our results suggest that the logistic formulation correctly captures the relationship between the probability of being mature and length. For year variability, including a year factor covariate or year random effect in the predictor model produces similar values of goodness of fit measures.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicSpatial and Panel Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207