MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6910541003 · doi:10.48336/ctec-0066

Improving age-based fish stock assessments, with an application to American Plaice on the Grand Bank of Newfoundland.

2021· article· en· W6910541003 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock assessmentStock (firearms)Fish stockPopulationPopulation dynamics of fisheriesMaximum sustainable yieldSampling design

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Age-based fish stock assessment models use available data to provide fisheries managers with estimates of population processes and to determine sustainable harvest rates. However, the data to inform these models is often complex and ignoring or oversimplifying these complexities can result in unsustainable or sub-optimal harvesting advice. This thesis improves age-based stock assessment models by accounting for important variability in the data. I first simulation tested nine methods that aim to account for the commonly used length-stratified age sampling design when estimating growth parameters. My results showed that commonly used methods had poor accuracy and the empirical proportion approach was optimal. Secondly, I developed a state-space stock assessment model for American plaice that allowed for errors in the underlying population processes and provided improvements in the retrospective plots. This research improved our understanding of American plaice population dynamics and growth and is a step forward in fitting more realistic integrated age-based stock assessment models.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)Same topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207