ALBACORE (Thunnus alalunga) REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY STUDY FOR THE NORTH ATLANTIC STOCK:YEARS 2020 AND 2021
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ICCAT North Atlantic Albacore (Thunnus alalunga) Research Program was established to \nenhance knowledge on albacore to provide more accurate scientific advice to the Commission. \nFunds are provided to the Albacore WG to develop research activities to accomplish several \nobjectives. One of the research objectives is to increase knowledge on reproductive biology for \nthe northern Atlantic stock, maturity schedules (L50) and egg production (size/age related \nfecundity. In March 2021, Terms of Reference were published by ICCAT. A Consortium \nintegrated by Canada, Venezuela, Chinese-Taipei and Spain presented an offer to collect \ngonad samples and spines throughout the year and carry out the study of reproductive biology \nfor North Atlantic albacore stock. \nResults of histological analysis: maturity stages, batch fecundity and seasonal area of \nspawners are presented as well as the age determined of partially collection of albacore \nspines. Analysis were done with the total albacore gonads samples collected in 2020 and \n2021 for the reproductive biology study of northern albacore.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".