Report of the Greenland Halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) Age Determination Workshop
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The workshop was held in St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, February 21-24, 2006. Prior to the workshop there was an exchange of otoliths and scales collected during the 2005 EU survey in SA3. During the workshop each lab presented information on ageing methods using scales, otolith whole and otolith section, no two labs were using the same method. Research related to methods and age validation was also presented. Observations have been made in recent years that suggest Greenland halibut are longer lived and slower growing than previously thought. The otolith cross-section methods presented during the workshop indicated older ages at a given length compared to surface ages. For the Alaskan stock it was suggested the methods deviate beginning at approx. 60 cm or age 7 yr. For the stock in NAFO SA0 deviations in the bias plot of whole versus section ages began at about age 15 (approx. 50 cm). For the Northeast Atlantic stock off the Norwegian coast ages derived from a revised whole otolith method began to deviate beginning at ages 4-5 (approx. 40 cm). Dark “featureless” translucent margins on large otoliths indicate an accumulation of compacted small annual zones. Greenland halibut have a larger size at maturity (40 cm for males and 60 cm for females) which is typical of many long-lived species. It became clear during the workshop that bias between age readers could not be solved by simply agreeing to common interpretation practices. Workshop participants provided several conclusions and recommendations.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".