Biology, Oceanography, and Fisheries of the North Pacific Transition Zone and Subarctic Frontal Zone: Papers from the North Pacific Transition Zone Workshop, Honolulu, Hawaii,\n9-11 May 1988
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the past few years, large-scale, high-seas driftnet fishing has sparked intense debate and political conflict inmany oceanic regions. In the Pacific Ocean the driftnetcontroversy first emerged in the North Pacific transitionzone and subarctic frontal zone, where driftnet vesselsfrom Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan pursuetheir target species of neon flying squid. Other NorthPacific driftnet fleets from Japan and Taiwan target stocksof tunas and billfishes. Both types of driftnet fishing incidentally kill valued non-target species of marine life, including fish, mammals, birds, and turtles.In response to public concerns about driftnet fishing,government scientists began early on to assemble availableinformation and consider what new data were required to assess impacts on North Pacific marine resources and the broader pelagic ecosystem. Accordingly, a workshop was convened at the NMFS Honolulu Laboratory in May 1988 to review current information on the biology, oceanography, and fisheries of the North Pacific transition zone and subarctic frontal zone. The workshop participants, from the United States and Canada, also developed a strategic plan to guide NMFS in developing a program of driftnet fishery research and impact assessment.This volume contains a selection of scientific reviewpapers presented at the 1988 Honolulu workshop. Thepapers represent part of the small kernel of informationavailable then, prior to the expansion of cooperative international scientific programs. Subsequent driftnet fishery monitoring and research by the United States, Canada, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan have added much new data.Nevertheless, this collection of papers provides a historical perspective and contains useful information not readily available elsewhere. (PDF file contains 118 pages.)
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".