MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6948412822 · doi:10.5066/p14rfkf4

Lake Ontario Spring (April) Prey Fish Bottom Trawl Survey, 1978-2025

2025· dataset· en· W6948412822 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueUSGS DOI Tool Production Environment · 2025
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSubterranean biodiversity and taxonomy
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Natural Resources and Forestry
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlewifePredationForage fishSpring (device)Fish <Actinopterygii>PopulationSampling (signal processing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This data release includes Lake Ontario fish data from the April or spring prey fish bottom trawl survey, conducted by multiple agencies from 1978 through 2025.This survey goal is to quantify the relative abundance and population dynamics of prey or forage fishes, and in particular Alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), which inform fisheries managers that decide on Lake Ontario predator fish stocking levels. This survey and associated data are also used to quantify the status of native fishes of conservation concern. Data tables describe the vessel and trawl operations, number and weight of species caught, relative abundance, size structure, and age interpretations. Data from 1978 - 2015 are from surveys covering only U.S. waters of Lake Ontario while survey data from 2016 - 2025 include both U.S. and Canadian waters of Lake Ontario. The data set also includes hydroacoustic prey fish density estimates for portions of the water not sampled by the bottom trawl (2021-2025). Details about the vessel and gear descriptions, sampling protocols, and catch processing protocols are provided in the metadata.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.153 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUSGS DOI Tool Production EnvironmentSame topicSubterranean biodiversity and taxonomyFrench-language works237,207