MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7038197663

Future declines of the binational Laurentian Great Lakes fisheries : the importance of environmental and cultural change

2010· article· en· W7038197663 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueStrathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicColeoptera Taxonomy and Distribution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFishingClimate changeFisheries managementCommercial fishingFish <Actinopterygii>Economic impact analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is increasingly clear that future long-term environmental challenges (eg climate change) are being driven by economic and cultural choices, as well as by physical and biological mechanisms. We looked at the extent to which these apply to potential future changes in fisheries in the Laurentian Great Lakes. These fisheries rank among the most valuable freshwater fisheries in the world, but have declined markedly in recent decades. To investigate how these fisheries might develop in the future, we elicited projections from experts in fisheries and related fields. Experts provided assessments on variables relating to US and Canadian commercial (pounds landed) and sport (participation and expenditures) fisheries for the years 2006 and 2025. We measured each expert's ability to quantify their uncertainty, producing performance-weighted combinations of expert estimates. All experts expected commercial fisheries to decline from 2006 to 2025, with greater declines in the US (25%) than in Canada (9%). Expectations for sport fishing differed more between lakes and less between countries, with median expected declines ranging from 1% to 13%. Experts attributed expected declines primarily to changes in economic market demands and shifts in societal interests. Increased attention to social and economic trends could aid Laurentian Great Lakes fishery policy and management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.152 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde)Same topicColeoptera Taxonomy and DistributionFrench-language works237,207