Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seal hunting (variously known as 'harvesting', 'slaughter', and 'killing'), or sealing, is currently practiced in eight countries, with most of the world's hunting taking place in Canada.The seal hunt is surrounded by controversy due to the clash between animal rights and environmentalist concerns and economic interests.In the 1960s, protesters pressured the Canadian government to pass legislation limiting the killing.Since then, killing quotas were introduced.The hunt has led to wide-spread protest by animalrights activists as well as other concerned groups, and by some international governmental institutions.Conservationists have demanded reduced rates of killing, arguing that the hunt is cruel as well as threatening to the very survival of the seals.There are two main reasons for the Canadian harp seal hunt: the seal products and the hunters' desire to keep the seals from eating the fish stocks on the eastern seaboard.Most sealing in Canada occurs in late March in the Gulf of St. Laurence and in the northeast of Newfoundland in April.Harp seals, the main species hunted, are called "hair seals", which depend on their blubber as their defence against the coldtheir pelts (skin with fur) have no underfur.The most seals killed are those under four months old that have just grown out of their white-coat stage.According to Sea Shepard Conservation Society Canada sells pelts to eleven countries, with Norway, Germany, Greenland, and China purchasing the largest quantities.Economic, cultural and environmental factors, as well as climate change, affect seal hunting.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.012 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".