MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133284380

Science response: 4RST Greenland halibut precautionary approach

2022· other· en· W7133284380 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
KeywordsHalibutFisheries managementStock (firearms)Precautionary principleContext (archaeology)Stock assessmentSustainable developmentFish stock
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2006, Canada has made national and international commitments to apply the precautionary approach (PA) in fisheries decision-making (DFO 2006). In recent years, Canada has taken several initiatives to define and establish benchmarks under the precautionary approach in the context of fisheries and incorporate them into fisheries management. Following recommendations made by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development (CESD 2016), Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) committed to developing and implementing a precautionary approach for the sustainable management of Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) in the Gulf of St. Lawrence (GSL, Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization [NAFO] Divisions 4RST). Greenland halibut in the GSL is a stock for which a precautionary approach is under development. A stock status indicator and limit reference point have been established since February 2017 (DFO 2018). A working group, comprised of representatives from DFO (Science and Fisheries Management), the industry, the provincial governments of Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador, and Aboriginal groups, was created in the fall of 2018 to develop a precautionary approach proposal. Objectives relating to the management of this stock, a target reference and upper stock reference points have been agreed on by the working group in 2020 (DFO 2021). The working group also considered the development of decision rules (hereinafter referred to as harvest control rules; HCR) and developed three HCR proposals. The Resource Management, Aquaculture and Aboriginal Affairs Directorate (hereafter referred to as Fisheries Management) has requested a Science Advice from the Regional Science Branch to determine the compliance of the proposed HCR according to the principles of the precautionary approach and to compare their advantages and disadvantages. This Science Response stems from the Regional Science Response process of November 15, 2021 on the Development of the Gulf of St. Lawrence Greenland Halibut Precautionary Approach (4RST).

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.840
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0390.024
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1050.036

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 head0.234
Teacher spread0.223 · 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→