MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414099587 · doi:10.12714/egejfas.42.3.01

An assessment of target markets for Türkiye's sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) exports: The CAPMA technique approach

2025· article· en· W4414099587 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Muhammed Fatih Aydemir

Bibliographic record

VenueEge Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSea bassBass (fish)SustainabilityTurkishInternational marketDicentrarchus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Türkiye is the global leader in sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) production and ranks second in exports. While sea bass is Türkiye's most exported fish, it is crucial to enhance this export to provide greater economic value and ensure the sustainability of production and exports. Therefore, exploring alternative markets is essential. This study aims to evaluate, compare, and classify alternative markets with the potential to boost Türkiye's sea bass exports. For this purpose, a relatively new multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method, the Classification Approach of Potential Market Alternatives (CAPMA) technique, was used in the study. The study encompassed a comprehensive analysis of 30 alternative markets, evaluated against five criteria, and categorized into four groups based on their capacity to enhance export volumes. The analysis identified nine countries (Sweden, France, Poland, Hong Kong, Japan, China, Thailand, the United States (US), and Malaysia) with the highest potential to increase Turkish sea bass exports. Six countries (Germany, Denmark, Finland, Singapore, Brazil and Canada) were identified as other countries where export potential is important to ensure country diversification, which is important for Türkiye's sustainable sea bass production and exports.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEge Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthFrench-language works237,207