Distribution pattern of cod and flounder in the Baltic Sea based on international coordinated trawl surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No abstracts are to be cited without prior reference to the author.International coordinated trawl surveys have been carried out in the Baltic Sea in quarter 1 and 4 since 2001 which use standardized gear types (small and larger version) and allocation of hauls based on agreed procedures. These surveys replaced the former national surveys where national gears were used and which were concentrated in quarter 1 and not internationally coordinated. The total number of hauls increased to about 190 in mean in quarter 4 and to about 300 fishing stations in quarter 1 in mean between 2002 and 2007. The new method of allocating the hauls guaranteed a good coverage of the total distribution area independent of the total number of planned stations. The catch per hour in units of the large standard gear by length intervals and age groups were used to study the distribution patterns of cod and flounder and to analyze the used stratification of the Baltic Sea during the Baltic International Trawl Surveys. Stratification of the Baltic Sea, which is optimal for all length groups of cod and flounder, does not exist because the highest densities of small and large cod and flounder were located in areas, which only partly overlapped. The correlation coefficients between the CPUE values of different length groups were low due to the patchy distribution of the different length groups of cod and flounder. Significant changes of the horizontal distributions are possible from survey to survey. The studies suggest that the depth stratification, which is a compromise to estimate stock indices based on BITS, can be used for the surveys in quarter 1 and 4. Nevertheless, the quality of the stock indices can probably be improved by the extension or intensification of the surveys into waters shallower than 20 m and by the use of larger strata, which enclose the areas with similar distribution patterns of CPUE values
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".