MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6925608441 · doi:10.17895/ices.pub.25350481

Quantifying Uncertainty in Estimates of Atlantic Cod (Gadus morhua) Consumption by Harp Seals (Pagophilus groenlandicus)

2005· other· en· W6925608441 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) · 2005
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroundfishAtlantic codArcticPopulationPredationHARPConsumption (sociology)The arctic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

No abstracts are to be cited without prior reference to the author.The decline in many groundfish stocks in Atlantic Canada has raised concerns about the role of seals in the Northwest Atlantic ecosystem. Estimates of consumption by predators are one piece of information that is required in order to determine the impact predators are having on the recovery of cod stocks. The objective of this paper is to describe the model used to estimate prey consumption by harp seals and to assess the sensitivity of estimate to model parameters. Consumption of Atlantic cod by harp seals in the northern Gulf of St Lawrence (NAFO zone 4RS3Pn) was estimated for the period 1985-2003. Estimates were obtained by combining information on harp seal abundance, energy requirements, diet composition and the distribution of animals. Consumption of Atlantic cod in 2003 was estimated to be in the order of 27,000 (SD = 6,800) tonnes. Current estimates differ from earlier studies by attempting to incorporate variability in population estimates, energy requirements, seal distribution, and diet composition. Sensitivity analysis indicated that the model was most sensitive to changes in population size, the parameters required to estimate energy requirements (ME, AF, body mass), the proportion of seals that enter the Gulf and the length of winter residency. Assumptions about the proportion of animals that remain throughout the year in the Arctic or southern waters had little impact on the estimates of cod consumption.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES)Same topicGeographies of human-animal interactionsFrench-language works237,207