MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133280392

Stock Assessment of Eastern Georges Bank Haddock

2025· other· en· W7133280392 on OpenAlexfundno 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 · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFisheries and Oceans Canada
KeywordsHaddockStock (firearms)FishingEcosystemStock assessmentClimate changeBioeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Status The 2024 model-estimated spawning stock biomass (SSB; 27,343 mt) is above the LRP with a probability of 100% and above the USR with a probability of 70%, placing the stock in the healthy zone. Trends The estimated SSB has declined from 81,453 mt in 2016 to 27,342 mt in 2024; however, SSB is still above the median of the time series. The model estimates of age-1 recruitment in 2020 and 2021 (90 million and 69 million, respectively) are above median recruitment of 8.8 million. Fishing mortality (F) was estimated to be 0.48 on average over the last five years with a decrease to 0.31 for 2024. The model-estimated natural mortality rate (M; 0.502) in recent years (2010–2024) continues to be high. Ecosystem and Climate Change Considerations Higher M estimates have been attributed to both density-dependent impacts of the 2013 year-class, and changes in spatial distribution related to environmental conditions. Haddock presence in deeper water strata off EGB indicates increased movement off the bank throughout the year, likely corresponding with ecosystem changes. Stock Advice Catch advice for 2026 ranged from 2,480–3,850 mt based on the 25–75% risk of exceeding Fref

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 score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.263
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
Published2025
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→