Third International Symposium on Deep-Sea Corals Science and Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is a great pleasure to welcome you all to the 3 rd International Symposium on Deep-Sea Corals. The purpose of the symposium is to provide a forum for scientific information exchange and explore new concepts and future collaboration among the participants. What will be discussed over the course of the next few days promises to be an exciting insight into the significant advances in ocean science and management of coldwater corals, sponges, seamounts, and associated fauna. We hope that you will participate in the creative discussions that will expand our collective understanding of the complex array of topics under the eight themes developed by the symposium advisory committee. Increasing interest in understanding and protecting deep-water ecosystems is clearly evident in discussions taking place at the United Nations and in several countries around the world. Interest in presenting and discussing scientific advances and ways to protect these areas has grown as well. In 2000, the 1 st International Symposium on Deep-Sea Corals took place in Halifax, Canada, with 42 oral presentations and 22 posters comprising the agenda. Three years later in Erlangen, Germany, the symposium had grown into 67 oral presentations and 42 posters. Realizing that the amount of interest and scientific advances in deepwater ecology was quickly
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 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; 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".