MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7111896303

Fremtidens Fiskeri:Rapport fra Fiskerikommissionen, december 2023

2023· book· da· W7111896303 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueVBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet) · 2023
Typebook
Languageda
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Policy, and Dickens Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute on Governance
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDebtState (computer science)Power (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Den 16. december 2021 besluttede Folketinget at nedsætte et ekspertudvalg for fiskeri (Fiskerikommissionen) til udarbejdelse af forslag til løsning af fiskeriets strukturelle, økonomiske og miljømæssige udfordringer efter Brexit. Gennem de seneste 25 år har dansk fiskeri gennemgået en markant strukturudvikling. Både antal fartøjer og bemanding er faldet markant, samtidig med at fiskefartøjerne i gennemsnit er blevet større, og at fiskeriet er blevet mere effektivt. Men mængden af landet fisk er også faldet betragteligt, kun delvist opvejet af stigende priser. Særligt i årene efter 2009 voksede rentabiliteten mærkbart, især for de større fiskefartøjer.Imidlertid har rentabiliteten været nedadgående siden 2016 – og ud over det tab af fiskerimuligheder, som Brexit medførte – står dansk fiskeri over for en række andre udfordringer i form af bl.a. reducerede fiskebestande, kamp om pladsen på havet og voksende miljø- og klimakrav. I denne rapport har Fiskerikommissionen identificeret og analyseret disse udfordringer nærmere og peger på en række muligheder for dansk fiskeri og for samfundet generelt. I tråd med kommissionens tolkning af kommissoriet er udfordringerne og mulighederne således ikke udelukkende snævert afgrænset til fiskeri, men har også et bredere samfundsmæssigt sigte.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0880.038

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.241 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet)Same topicMigration, Policy, and Dickens StudiesFrench-language works237,207