Fishing for the future: How coastal and island fishing communities in Maine and Newfoundland remain in place
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fisheries have historically been the backbone of small coastal and island communities in Maine and Newfoundland. Innovative methods of responding to changes in fisheries have been integral in allowing both small-scale fisheries and island communities to remain in place. This presentation explores the relationship between fisheries and community development by using community perspectives from seven communities in two regions. The first part of this presentation will discuss six communities; three from Newfoundland (Anchor Point, Change Islands, and Fogo Island) and three from Maine (Chebeague Island, Monhegan Island, and Swan’s Island) and will based upon research from the fall of 2012. The second half of the presentation will focus on Cranberry Isles. The methods that are explored are both internal (delayed season start and island specific licensing) and external (co-operatives and different marketing programs) to the existing management system. There are similarities that can be seen across differences in scale, governing structures, and location with reference to mainland communities and markets.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".