MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7095624464

Summary The Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Review Committee Meeting (SARC) took

2007· article· en· W7095624464 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIrish and British Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock assessmentFishingCommissionStock (firearms)Bass (fish)Schedule
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The SARC meeting was adeptly chaired by the SARC chair Michael Murphy and, in combination with the well organized facilities, resources and background support provided by NOAA staff, the meeting ran to schedule in a relaxed format, allowing sufficient time for clarification of questions on presentations, further analysis if required and detailed discussion on each TOR. The assessment team was well prepared for the meeting and the presentations on data collection, raising, analysis and model outputs were well structured and consistent. The ability, attitude, and collaborative team-work demonstrated by the assessment team participants was of a comparable, high standard to those attending assessment meetings that I have participated in within the International Commission for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), Canada, and the North Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO). The assessment team addressed and met all of its terms of reference and their conclusion that the stock is currently not over-fished and over-fishing is not occurring is appropriate. Based on the results of the catch at age analysis the bass spawning stock biomass is well above the biomass reference threshold and fishing mortality is currently at the target level

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.021

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIrish and British StudiesFrench-language works237,207