MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7014890298

Report of the Working Group on Report on Assessment of New MoU Species (WGNEW).18 - 22 March 2013, ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark

2013· article· en· W7014890298 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Archive of Ifremer (French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWitchTurbotPeninsulaQuarter (Canadian coin)Division (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ICES Working Group on Assessment of New MoU Species met at ICES Head-quarters in Copenhagen, Denmark, during 18–22 March 2012. There were 9 partici-pants from 7 countries. The main task of WGNEW is to provide information on the new species and stocks of the MoU between ICES and the EC: Each year, different stocks are being dealt with, including but not limited to sea bass, striped red mullet, red gurnard, tub gurnard, grey gurnard, turbot, brill, dab, flounder, lemon sole, witch flounder, pollack and John dory. For most stocks, this information includes total international landings and research vessel survey data that are indicative of abundance trends. The International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) was used often along other internationally coordinated surveys. The IBTS is held annually in the first and the third quarter of the year. This year, WGNEW collated information on Brill in Subarea IV and Divisions IIIa and VIId,e, Dab in Subarea IV and Division IIIa, Floun-der in Division IIIa and Subarea IV, Lemon sole in Subarea IV and Divisions IIIa and VIId, Witch in Subarea IV, Division IIIa and VIId, Sole in Divisions VIIIc and IXa, Tub gurnard in all areas, Turbot in Division IIIa, Sea bass in Divisions VIIIa,b, Sea bass in Divisions VIIIc and IXa.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0640.034

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.244 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Archive of Ifremer (French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea)Same topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207