MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133288744

Assessing the productivity of the Georges Bank ‘a’ and Browns Bank North offshore scallop stocks and the impact of two-year projection advice

2024· other· en· W7133288744 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jessica A.‏ Sameoto, Freya Keyser, David M. Keith

Bibliographic record

VenueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du Canada · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock (firearms)Submarine pipelineProductivityPopulationContext (archaeology)Stock assessmentImpact assessmentProduction (economics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Georges Bank ‘a’ (GBa) and Browns Bank North (BBn) comprise the majority of catches from the Offshore Scallop fishery in the Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) Maritimes Region. Each stock is managed using a total allowable catch (TAC) and has an annual analytical assessment that uses a modified version of a state-space delay-difference population model to provide a one-year biomass projection to inform the setting of the harvest level. However, in 2020, the DFO Science Offshore Scallop survey was cancelled due to challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. In the absence of survey data, two-year model projections are needed to update the stock status for 2021. The objectives of this document are to evaluate the productivity of these stocks based on the population assessment models, to derive two-year model projections to inform the final TAC decisions for 2021, and to evaluate the impact and uncertainty of the two-year model projections. For GBa, the surplus production rate estimates ranged from 0.25 to 0.27, which is consistent with previous estimates. For BBn, the surplus production rate estimates ranged from 0.13 to 0.15, which is higher than previous estimates. The scallop stocks on GBa and BBn demonstrate substantial interannual variability in their productivity such that, relative to the use of one-year projections, use of two-year projections as the basis for management decisions over the long term would result in substantial risk of either loss in potential catch or overharvesting. However, in the context of tactical one-year decision making and in the absence of 2020 survey data, these two-year projections provide context for decision making for the 2021 harvest level. For the two-year projection scenarios evaluated, the probability that the GBa 2021 fully recruited biomass would be above the upper stock reference and in the healthy zone after removing 4,000 mt (the 2021 interim TAC) is at least 0.98; this is predicted to result in an exploitation rate between 0.08 and 0.1 and an expected range of biomass change between −10% and 18%. For BBn, for the two-year projection scenarios, removing 300 mt (the 2021 interim TAC) is predicted to result in an exploitation rate between 0.12 and 0.14 and corresponds to an expected range of biomass change between −14% and 1%.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.268
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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