MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6925191829 · doi:10.17632/dtk86rjm86.1

Kernel Density Analyses of Coral and Sponge Catches from Research Vessel Survey Data for Use in Identification of Significant Benthic Areas

2018· dataset· en· W6925191829 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · 2018
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmazonian Archaeology and Ethnohistory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenthic zoneSmoothingKernel density estimationKernel (algebra)CoralBiomass (ecology)Abundance (ecology)Identification (biology)Survey data collection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kernel density estimation (KDE) utilizes spatially explicit data to model the distribution of a variable of interest. It is a simple non-parametric neighbour-based smoothing function that relies on few assumptions about the structure of the observed data. It has been used in ecology to identify hotspots, that is, areas of relatively high biomass/abundance, and in 2010 was used by Fisheries and Oceans Canada to delineate significant concentrations of corals and sponges. The same approach has been used successfully in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) Regulatory Area. Here, we update the previous analyses with the catch records from up to 5 additional years of trawl survey data from Eastern Canada, including the Gulf of St. Lawrence. We applied kernel density estimation to create a modelled biomass surface for each of sponges, small and large gorgonian corals, and sea pens, and applied an aerial expansion method to identify significant concentrations of theses taxa. We compared our results to those obtained previously and provided maps of significant concentrations as well as point data co-ordinates for catches above the threshold values used to construct the significant area polygons. The borders of the polygons can be refined using knowledge of null catches and species distribution models of species presence/absence and/or biomass.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.625
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.288
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.092 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)Same topicAmazonian Archaeology and EthnohistoryFrench-language works237,207