MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7130417112 · doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.34771.64806

Assessing the Abundance of Basking Sharks (Cetorhinus maximus) in Atlantic Canadian Waters

2022· article· en· W7130417112 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stephen B. Taylor

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbundance (ecology)EctothermFishingDistance sampling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Atlantic Canadian population of basking sharks (Cetorhinus maximus) is designated Special Concern by COSEWIC. Little is known about their population size or life history, though they are considered to have long life histories and be inherently unproductive. Estimating population size from aerial surveys gave mean abundances ranging from 3,600 to 7,146 in 2007 and from 13,544 to 27,682 in 2016, depending on assumptions. The estimated median intrinsic rate of population increase was 0.0197, and potential population growth became negative if historical bycatch was accounted for. These population growth rates cannot account for the increase in abundance predicted from aerial survey data. Substantial migration into Canadian waters and/or a much more productive life history would be needed in conjunction. These results highlight the need for continued monitoring, potential improvement in methods to estimate abundance, and the development of non-lethal sampling for determining life history parameters.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same topicIchthyology and Marine Biology→French-language works237,207→