Information to Support the Assessment of Northern Shrimp, Pandalus borealis, and Striped Shrimp, Pandalus montagui, in the Eastern and Western Assessment Zones, February 2017
Bibliographic record
Abstract
he status of the Northern Shrimp (Pandalus borealis) and Striped Shrimp (P. montagui) resources in the Eastern Assessment Zone (EAZ) and the Western Assessment Zone (WAZ) were assessed based on the results of fishery-independent surveys jointly conducted by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) and the Northern Shrimp Research Foundation (NSRF) and commercial catch information. Data for the EAZ assessment spanned the years 2006– 2016. Results from individual survey areas within the EAZ are provided. Northern Shrimp in the EAZ were assessed to be within the Healthy Zone of the Precautionary Approach Framework with the fishable biomass in the last two years (2015 and 2016) being higher than the long term mean for the area. The potential exploitation rate for 2016/17, based on the TAC of 9,488 t, is approximately 14.5%. Striped Shrimp biomass in the EAZ has fluctuated considerably over the past six surveys, making interpretation of the time series challenging as no clear trend can be inferred. These fluctuations moved Striped Shrimp in the EAZ from a middle point of the Cautious Zone in 2015/16 into the Healthy Zone in 2016/17. Taking into consideration the large interannual biomass fluctuations, caution is advised when setting the TAC for the 2016/17 fishing season. The latest survey (2016) was the third consecutive survey since the time series restarted in the WAZ due to changes in the survey vessel, gear and timing, and a lack of standardization with the prior surveys. The potential exploitation rate indices are 15.9% and 19.3% for Northern Shrimp and Striped Shrimp, respectively, in the WAZ in 2016. These rates are above the target exploitation rate of 15%. While a statistically significant declining trend has not been detected, continuous declines over the last 3 years in the mean biomass for Striped Shrimp in the WAZ are cause for caution when setting the TAC. Precaution should be taken with the WAZ stocks until there is an adequate time series (i.e., at least 5 years of surveys) to develop reference points for the WAZ.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.005 |
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".