Report of the Workshop on a Synthesis of the Cod and Climate Programme (WKCCP)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Workshop on a Synthesis of the Cod and Climate Programme [WKCCP] (Co-Chairs: K. Drinkwater, Canada and K. Brander, ICES/GLOBEC) met in New Bedford, USA from 5–7 May 2003. The terms of the reference (C: Res.2002/2C11) for the workshop were to: a) review what we have learned from the workshops, theme sessions and other activities of the Cod and Climate programme over the past 10 years; b) present and discuss synthesis papers on specified topics related to the life history of cod; c) finalize the plan to publish these synthesis papers as a book on cod. There were 14 participants from 5 countries (Canada, Denmark, Greenland, Norway, and USA) and the ICES/GLOBEC Coordinator. A list of participants is provided in Appendix 1.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.048 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.125 | 0.023 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".