MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6948450091 · doi:10.5066/p14fus2b

Lake Erie Pelagic Prey Fish Community Data, 2022-2024

2025· dataset· en· W6948450091 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueUSGS DOI Tool Production Environment · 2025
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Natural Resources and Forestry
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPelagic zonePredationAbundance (ecology)Fish <Actinopterygii>Sampling (signal processing)Distribution (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2005, the U.S. Geological Survey - Great Lakes Science Center's Lake Erie Biological Station (LEBS) has participated in a collaborative, multiagency effort to assess pelagic prey fish populations in the western (WB), central (CB), and eastern (EB) basins of Lake Erie through a combination of hydroacoustic and midwater trawl sampling. Assessing lake-wide distribution and abundance of pelagic prey species over time facilitates evaluation of large-scale drivers of fish production while also considering food-web dynamics at a smaller sub-basin scale. Information from this survey will support decision making within an ecosystem-based fishery management framework. In support of binational Great Lakes fishery management, the objectives of this survey are to provide density estimates of key pelagic prey species across Lake Erie, to assess spatial distributions of fishes, and annual fluctuations in abundance. A stratified-random sampling approach including 24 strata was carried out during July (Summer), starting in 2022. This data release adds 2024 data to the set for a total of 3 years using the standardized survey design and data processing workflow.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient 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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.010

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUSGS DOI Tool Production EnvironmentFrench-language works237,207