Sustainable Whaling in Contemporary Perspective: Introductory Remarks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"Whaling in current times remains a problematic common property management issue, both because of the difficulties inherent in managing fugitive commonpool resources for sustainable use and for another, and quite new, consideration, namely the high symbolic and emotional loading accorded, for whatever reason, to this particular class of natural resource. \n \n"The papers in today and tomorrow's three whaling sessions will explore some of these issues and, hopefully, lead to constructive discussion of the problems. It is important to remind ourselves that the impact of these problems is more especially focused upon those whose dependence on the resource is greatest, namely individuals and communities having developed cultural, social, nutritional and economic dependencies on these particular fishery resources. It is for this reason that most of the presenters at these sessions are social scientists, for the biological aspects of management are addressed each year at the meetings of the Scientific Committee of the International Commission. Thus this present meeting is one of a series of meetings organized to provide opportunity to explore and present the human side of this management debate through discussions to be held here and through subsequent publication of the views expressed."
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".