MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133286480

Review of the assessment framework for Atlantic cod in NAFO 3Pn4RS : Fishery independent surveys

2022· other· en· W7133286480 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hugues P.‏ Benoît, Jordan Ouellette-Plante, Yihao Yin, Claude Brassard

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
KeywordsFishingStock (firearms)Stock assessmentCod fisheriesPopulationCommercial fishing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fisheries and Oceans Canada in the Quebec region undertook in 2021-2022 a review of the assessment framework for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) 3Pn4RS Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) stock in the northern Gulf of St. Lawrence. A review of assessment inputs, including information on reported and non-reported fishery catches, tagging information and fishery independent monitoring results took place in the spring of 2021. The principal objective of the present document was to review the availability, duration and quality of fishery independent survey indices and information for the stock. In doing so, we considered how these sources of information contribute to understanding population dynamics, via trends in abundance, demographic composition and mortality rates. Several advances were made as part of the review and which are expected to improve the quality of the assessment. First, the principal age-disaggregated indices obtained from a bottom-trawl research vessel survey were extended back in time from 1990 to 1984 by analyzing and applying results of a comparative fishing experiment that allowed to calibrate the series for the vessel used in the early years of the survey. This extends the time series to before the period when the stock collapsed. Second, a single coherent set of age-disaggregated indices for a Sentinel bottom trawl survey was obtained by combining two sets of indices covering different periods of years. Third, data from a winter survey that ran in the 1980s and 1990s and which had been disregarded were found to produce useful information on the age-composition for the cod stock over the 1983-1994 period. Fourth, results from historical surveys conducted in the 1950s and 1960s, the period during which trawls were introduced into the fishery and landings increased considerably, were found to provide useful estimates of mortality rates, notably an estimate of an upper bound for the natural morality rate. Fifth, an overhaul of the methods used to estimate age-disaggregated indices of abundance from the Sentinel fixed gear program resulted in the creation of three independent sets of indices, two based on longline catches and one based on gillnet catches. The overhaul was motivated by several issues that had arisen over time with the traditionally used catch-rate standardization approach. Overall, the revised indices provide a coherent picture of stock dynamics, including very similar trends across indices in the estimated rate of total mortality. Furthermore, the extension of information on the stock to the 1950s and abundance indices to the 1980s prior to stock collapse, is likely to provide a more accurate picture of the historical size and productivity of the stock, which in turn should allow for the establishment of more pertinent reference points for its management.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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 score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score0.661

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0190.020
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 CanadaFrench-language works237,207