Report of the Scientific Council Meeting 01 -15 June 2017
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Council met at the Sobey Building, Saint Mary’s University, Halifax, NS, Canada, during 01 – 15 June 2017, to consider the various matters in its Agenda. Representatives attended from Canada, Denmark (in \nrespect of Faroe Islands and Greenland), the European Union (France, Germany (via WebEx), Portugal, Spain, the United Kingdom and the European Commission), Japan, the Russian Federation and the United States of \nAmerica. Observers from the Ecology Action Centre and Dalhousie University were also present. The Executive Secretary, Scientific Council Coordinator and other members of the Secretariat were in attendance. \nThe Executive Committee met prior to the opening session of the Council to discuss the provisional agenda and plan of work. \nThe Council was called to order at 1000 hours on 01 June 2017. The provisional agenda was adopted with modification. The Scientific Council Coordinator was appointed the rapporteur. \nThe Council was informed that the meeting was quorate and authorization had been received by the Executive Secretary for proxy votes from the European Union, Denmark (in respect of Faroe Islands and Greenland), \nIceland, Japan, Republic of Korea, and Norway. The opening session was adjourned at 1200 hours on 01 June 2017. Several sessions were held throughout the \ncourse of the meeting to deal with specific items on the agenda. The Council considered adopted the STACFEN report on 8 June 2017, and the STACPUB, STACFIS and STACREC reports on 15 June 2017. \nThe concluding session was called to order at 0830 hours on 15 June 2017. The Council considered and adopted the report the Scientific Council Report of this meeting of 01 -15 June \n2017. The Chair received approval to leave the report in draft form for about two weeks to allow for minor editing and proof-reading on the usual strict understanding there would be no substantive changes. \nThe meeting was adjourned at 1430 hours on 15 June 2017. The Reports of the Standing Committees as adopted by the Council are appended as follows: Appendix I - Report \nof the Standing Committee on Fisheries Environment (STACFEN), Appendix II - Report of Standing Committee on Publications (STACPUB), Appendix III - Report of Standing Committee on Research Coordination \n(STACREC), and Appendix IV - Report of Standing Committee on Fisheries Science (STACFIS). The Agenda, List of Research (SCR) and Summary (SCS) Documents, and List of Representatives, Advisers and \nExperts, are given in Appendix V-VII. The Council’s considerations on the Standing Committee Reports, and other matters addressed by the Council \nfollow in Sections II-XV.
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 | 0.019 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.148 | 0.132 |
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".