Final Report to the Yukon River Drainage Fisheries Association (YRDFA) YRDFA Contract Number: 04-001; Financial Coding; #4 NRDA, Obj. 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Record low runs of chinook salmon to the Yukon River in the late 1990s intensified concerns about salmon bycatch by U.S. groundfish fisheries in the eastern Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI). We estimated the bycatch of Yukon River chinook salmon by the BSAI groundfish fisheries in 1997-1999, and evaluated the effect of the BSAI bycatch on Yukon River fisheries and resources. Estimated interceptions of Yukon River chinook salmon by the BSAI fisheries were 7,266 fish in 1997, 8,908 fish in 1998, and 3,074 fish in 1999. Adult equivalent (AEQ) bycatch estimates were 6,522 fish in 1997, 7,510 fish in 1998, and 2,721 fish in 1999. The AEQ bycatch was equal to 1-4% of the minimum run, 12-51% of the minimum (lower river) escapement, 10-38% of upper river (Canadian) escapement, 3-35% of the Alaska commercial catch, 6-9% of the Alaska subsistence catch, or 22-84% of the Canadian catch of chinook salmon in the Yukon River in 1997-2000. We conclude that in years when chinook salmon runs are low, even relatively low incidental catches of salmon by non-target marine fisheries may reduce local utilization of chinook salmon
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.406 | 0.219 |
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".