Workshop report on recent and short-term research and monitoring efforts in the St. Anns Bank marine protected area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A workshop on recent scientific research projects in the St. Anns Bank Marine Protected Area (SAB MPA) was held on March 7, 2024, following the Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat (CSAS) monitoring review for St. Anns Bank on March 5-6. This hybrid workshop focused on research initiatives led by external organizations and by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) in the MPA since its designation in 2017. Recently developed monitoring programs, short-term projects and information streams were showcased during the workshop. These projects were not subject to peer-review in the CSAS meeting and were presented in the workshop to communicate current scientific efforts occurring in the MPA and promote collaboration. Projects were presented by DFO scientists from the Bedford Institute of Oceanography and St. Andrews Biological Station, as well as external partners including the Geological Survey of Canada, Cape Breton University, the Ocean Tracking Network, and Cape Breton Fish Harvesters Association. The workshop showcased a diversity of new and ongoing research, with topics including acoustic telemetry, benthic imagery, net-based sampling, trawl surveys and environmental DNA (eDNA) sampling. Discussions during the workshop highlighted a need for external partners to help monitor the SAB MPA, and to further develop collaborations. The need for Indigenous knowledge and involvement of the Mi’kmaq in monitoring the MPA was also discussed as a key component while a co-governance arrangement develops between DFO and the Mi’kmaq for the SAB MPA. Regular workshops were suggested on an annual or biannual schedule to keep partners and stakeholders informed on ongoing research in the MPA. This can help strengthen collaboration and partnerships, and ensure adequate scientific monitoring is occurring.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.009 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".