hippoglossoides, in the Northwest Atlantic from Tagging in the Labrador-Newfoundland Region*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Migratory patterns of Greenland halibut in the Northwest Atlantic were investigated by two tagging experiments in 1969 and 1971 using longlines to capture the fish and three experiments in 1979-80 using otter trawls. Of nearly 24,400 tags applied, only 1.3 % have been recovered to the end of 1983, the low recovery rate being attributed partly to the low level of offshore fishing activity and partly to high tagging mortality of fish caught in otter trawls. Results of the White Bayexperiment in 1969 showed some movement of Greenland halibut from the tagging area to offshore deepwater areas of Labrador and Davis Strait, although many of the recaptures were in the general area of tagging. However, the Trinity Bay and Fortune Bay experiments in 1971 and 1979 respectively indicated little movements from the tagging sites. The Funk Island Bank experiments in 1979 and 1980 indicated substantial movement to coastal waters of northeastern Newfoundland in summer, but tags were also recovered both south and north of the tagging areas, the most northerly of the latter from the northern edge of Hamilton Bank. From tagging experiments off Labrador in 1980, the few returns ind icated eastward movement to the deepwater areas of the continental slope, with one recaptu re from deep water off the northern tip of Labrador.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".