Light Intensity of Phosphorescent-Netting Pots and Determining Their Visibility to Snow Crab (Chionoecetes opilio) Using Visual Modeling Techniques
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the visibility of phosphorescent-netting pots to snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio) using visual modeling techniques. Light emitted from such pots increases catch per unit effort, yet little is understood about the factors driving these higher catch rates. In this study, we measure pot light emission and snow crab visual acuity. Combining these data with estimates obtained in the literature for other biotic and abiotic factors, we model snow crab vision in relation to the pots. Utilizing these factors and environmental conditions, we derive a contrast ratio between the pot light and the ambient light. Findings reveal that the visibility of pot lights at 200-m depth depends primarily on solar angle (time of day) and time elapsed post-deployment. Additional factors influencing the vision of the pots include water column quality and benthic boundary layer turbidity. This study is the first to model the visual ecology of snow crab and the first to estimate snow crab visual acuity. These insights into snow crab visual ecology can potentially enhance fishing techniques, promote catch efficiency and sustainability, and help provide a path forward for visual ecology research in the fisheries science field.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it