MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133276027

Science response: 2021 stock status update of cusk in NAFO divisions 4VWX5Z

2022· other· en· W7133276027 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Pêches et Océans Canada

Bibliographic record

VenueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du Canada · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThreatened speciesStock (firearms)Endangered speciesTreasuryIndex (typography)GroundfishRevenue
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cusk, Brosme brosme, is caught as bycatch in certain directed fisheries. Most landings are in the groundfish longline fisheries. Commercial catch rates for Cusk declined after the 1980s. Changes to management measures (e.g., reductions to trip limits, overall caps, and bycatch percentages) may have contributed to this reduction in catch rates (and landings); however, it is thought the decline in Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) is also due to a decline in Cusk abundance (Harris and Hanke 2010). The extent of the decline in abundance is not known. The Industry-DFO Halibut Fixed Station Longline Survey (Halibut Survey) catch per station has been accepted as the ongoing index for monitoring Cusk biomass. The Upper Stock Reference (USR) and Limit Reference Point (LRP) for Cusk were set at 26.6 kg and 13.3 kg, respectively (Harris et al. 2012). The 3-year geometric mean of the biomass index was accepted as the metric for monitoring Cusk status relative to the USR and LRP. Cusk biomass has remained above the LRP since 2008 (DFO 2014). Cusk was assessed as threatened by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) in 2003 and later reassessed as endangered (COSEWIC 2012). In response to the 2003 assessment, the Governor in Council decided in 2013 not to add Cusk to the List of Wildlife Species at Risk set out in Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act (SARA; Minister of Justice, Canada 2013). DFO’s Resource Management Sector asked Science to determine what the 3-year geometric mean of the Cusk index is from the Halibut Survey relative to the USR and the LRP. The information will be used by DFO Resource Management as guidance in discussions with various industry stakeholders on recommendations for management measures. The current 3-year geometric mean (2019–2021) of the Cusk biomass index remains above the LRP at 13.8 kg. This Science Response Report results from the Regional Science Response Process of December 15, 2021, on the Stock Status Update of Cusk in 4VWX5 in the Maritimes Region.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0880.042

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du Canada→French-language works237,207→