DRAFT Fishery Management Plan for Fish Resources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
NOTE: This is an interim draft of what the Arctic FMP will look like. It is written assuming the Council chose Alternative 3 and exempted a small red king crab fishery in the eastern Chukchi Sea from this FMP. The Council has NOT chosen its preferred alternative, so this is merely an example of the FMP at this time. The Council also has not chosen its preferred option for specifying conservation and management measures; therefore, both Option 1 and Option 2 are included in this draft FMP. This draft does not fully respond to comments from the Council's SSC, particularly regarding Options 1 and 2; SSC comments on an earlier draft FMP are listed in the accompanying EA/RIR/IRFA. Please refer to this document for detailed analyses of the alternatives and options and for additional background information. NOTE: This document has not been cleared by NOAA General Counsel, Alaska Region. [this page intentionally left blank] Executive Summary This Fishery Management Plan (FMP) governs all commercial harvests of fish in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas. 1 The FMP management area, the Arctic Management Area, is all marine waters in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone of the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas from 3 nautical miles offshore the coast of Alaska or its baseline to 200 nautical miles offshore, north of Bering Strait (from Cape Prince of Wales to Cape Dezhneva) and westward to the U.S./Russia Convention Line of 1867 and eastward to the U.S./Canada maritime boundary (see Appendix A). The FMP covers commercial fisheries (any commercial harvests) for all stocks of fish, which include all finfish, shellfish, or other marine living resources except salmonids, Pacific halibut, Pacific herring, whitefish, and Dolly Varden char. The FMP was implemented on (***DATE***). It may be referred to as the Arctic Fishery 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.108 | 0.059 |
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".