Using Machine Learning to Uncover Latent Research Topics in Fishery Models

Reviews in Fisheries Science and Aquaculture

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 2018, Pages 319-336

  Syed, Shaheen ^a,b   Weber, Charlotte Teresa ^c  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b MANCHESTER METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TROMSØ   (Norway)

Author keywords

fisheries models; fisheries science; latent Dirichlet allocation; research trends; Topic models

Indexed keywords

EID: 85045455715     PISSN: 23308249     EISSN: 23308257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/23308249.2017.1416331     Document Type: Review

References (66)

1. Aksnes, D. W., and H. I., Browman. An overview of global research effort in fisheries science. ICES J. Mar. Sci.: J. du Conseil, 73(4): 1004–1011 (2016). doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsv248.
2. Aletras, N., and M., Stevenson. Evaluating topic coherence using distributional semantics. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computational Semantics (IWCS 2013). Association for Computational Linguistics, 13–22 (2013).
3. Allen, K. R., A method of fitting growth curves of the von bertalanffy type to observed data. J. Fish. Res. Board Can., 23(2): 163–179 (1966). doi:10.1139/f66-016.
4. Angelini, R., and C. L., Moloney. Fisheries, ecology and modelling: An historical perspective. Pan-Am. J. Aquat. Sci., 2(2): 75–85 (2007).
5. Asuncion, A., M., Welling, P., Smyth, and Y. W., Teh. On smoothing and inference for topic models. Proc. Twenty-Fifth Conf. Uncertainty Artif. Intell., (Ml): 27–34 (2012).
6. Baker, M. R., D. E., Schindler, T. E., Essington, and R., Hilborn. Accounting for escape mortality in fisheries: Implications for stock productivity and optimal management. Ecol. Appl., 24(1): 55–70 (2014). doi:10.1890/12-1871.1.
7. Bastardie, F., J. R., Nielsen, and T., Miethe. DISPLACE: A dynamic, individual-based model for spatial fishing planning and effort displacement — integrating underlying fish population models. Can. J. Fish Aquat. Sci., 71(3): 366–386 (2014). doi:10.1139/cjfas-2013-0126.
8. von Bertalanffy, L., Quantitative laws in metabolism and growth. Q. Rev. Biol., 32(3): 217–231 (1957). doi:10.1086/401873.
9. Bjørndal, T., D. E., Lane, and A., Weintraub. Operational research models and the management of fisheries and aquaculture: A review. Eur. J. Oper. Res., 156(3): 533–540 (2004). doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00107-3.
10. Blei, D. M., Communications of the ACM, 55(4): 77–84 (2012). doi: 10.1145/2133806.2133826.
11. Blei, D. M., and M. I., Jordan. Variational inference for dirichlet process mixtures. Bayesian Anal., 1(1): 121–143 (2006). doi:10.1214/06-BA104.
12. Blei, D. M., and J. D., Lafferty. Dynamic topic models. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Machine learning–ICML '06. New York, NY: ACM Press, 113–120 (2006). doi:10.1145/1143844.1143859
13. Blei, D. M., A. Y., Ng, and M. I., Jordan. Latent dirichlet allocation. J. Machine Learn. Res., 3: 993–1022 (2003).
14. Bouma, G., Normalized (Pointwise) mutual information in collocation extraction. In: Proceedings of German Society for Computational Linguistics (GSCL 2009). 31–40 (2009).
15. Caddy, J. F., Current usage of fisheries indicators and reference points, and their potential application to management of fisheries for marine invertebrates. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Scie., 61(8): 1307–1324 (2004). doi:10.1139/f04-132.
16. Caddy, J. F., and R., Mahon. Reference points for fisheries management, vol. 347. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Fisheries Technical Paper. Rome: FAO (1995).
17. Cadrin, S. X., and M., Dickey-Collas. Stock assessment methods for sustainable fisheries. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 72(1): 1–6 (2015). doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsu228.
18. Chuang, J., D., Ramage, C. D., Manning, and J., Heer. Interpretation and trust: Designing model-driven visualizations for text analysis. pp. 443–452. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (G. Rebecca, T. Rodden, P. Aoki, E. Cutrell, J. Robin and G. Olson, Eds). Montreal, Canada: ACM.
19. Debortoli, S., O., Müller, I., Junglas, and J., Vom Brocke. Text mining for information systems researchers: An annotated topic modeling tutorial. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 39: 110–135 (2016).
20. Deerwester, S., S. T., Dumais, G. W., Furnas, T. K., Landauer, and R., Harshman. Indexing by latent semantic analysis. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci., 41(6): 391–407 (1990). doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199009)41:6%3c391::AID-ASI1%3e3.0.CO;2-9.
21. DiMaggio, P., M., Nag, and D., Blei. Exploiting affinities between topic modeling and the sociological perspective on culture: Application to newspaper coverage of U.S. government arts funding. Poetics, 41(6): 570–606 (2013). doi:10.1016/j.poetic.2013.08.004.
22. Epstein, J. M., Why model? J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul., 11(4): 12 (2008).
23. Evangelopoulos, N., X., Zhang, and V. R., Prybutok. Latent Semantic Analysis: Five methodological recommendations. Eur. J. Inf. Syst., 21(1): 70–86 (2012). doi:10.1057/ejis.2010.61.
24. FAO. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2016. Contributing to food security and nutrition for all. Rome (2016).
25. Froese, R., N., Demirel, G., Coro, K. M., Kleisner, and H., Winker. Estimating fisheries reference points from catch and resilience. Fish Fish., 18(3): 506–526 (2017). doi:10.1111/faf.12190.
26. Gaichas, S. K., M., Fogarty, G., Fay, R., Gamble, S., Lucey, and L., Smith. Combining stock, multispecies, and ecosystem level fishery objectives within an operational management procedure: Simulations to start the conversation. ICES J. Mar. Sci.: J. du Conseil, 74(2): 552–565 (2017).
27. Le Gallic, B., Fisheries Sustainability Indicators: The OECD experience. Joint workshop on “Tools for measuring (integrated) Fisheries Policy aiming at sustainable ecosystem”. Brussels: OECD (2002).
28. Gerl, T., H., Kreibich, G., Franco, D., Marechal, and K., Schröter. A review of flood loss models as basis for harmonization and benchmarking. PLOS ONE, 11(7): e0159791 (2016). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0159791.
29. Griffiths, S. P., and G., Fay. Integrating recreational fisheries data into stock assessment: Implications for model performance and subsequent harvest strategies. Fish. Manage. Ecol., 22(3): 197–212 (2015). doi:10.1111/fme.12117.
30. Griffiths, T. L., and M., Steyvers. Finding scientific topics. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 101(Supplement 1): 5228–5235 (2004). doi:10.1073/pnas.0307752101.
31. Griffiths, T. L., M., Steyvers, and J. B., Tenenbaum. Topics in semantic representation. Psychol. Rev., 114(2): 211–244 (2007).
32. Haapasaari, P., S., Mäntyniemi, and S., Kuikka. Baltic herring fisheries management: Stakeholder views to frame the problem. Ecol. Soc., 17(3): art36 (2012). doi:10.5751/ES-04907-170336.
33. Hilborn, R., and C. J., Walters Quantitative fisheries stock assessment: Choice, dynamics and uncertainty. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall (1992).
34. Hoffman, M. D., D. M., Blei, and F., Bach. Online learning for latent Dirichlet allocation. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, Vol. 1, pp. 856–864. USA: Curran Associates Inc. (2010).
35. Hofmann, T., Probabilistic latent semantic indexing. In: Proceedings of the 22nd annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, Berkeley, California, USA, 50–57. New York: ACM. isbn = 1-58113-096-1 (1999). doi = 10.1145/312624.312649
36. Hoggarth, D. D., S., Abeyasekera, R. I., Arthur, J. R., Beddington, R. W., Burn, A. S., Halls, G. P., Kirkwood, M., McAllister, P., Medley, C. C., Mees, G. B., Parkes, G. M., Pilling, R. C., Wakeford, and R. L., Welcomme. Stock assessment for fishery management: A framework guide to the stock assessment tools of the fisheries management and science programme. FAO Fish. Tech. Pap., 487 (2006).
37. ICES. Report of the SIHD survey of the current state of ‘human dimension' in some ICES groups, 31 pp. (2016).
38. ICES. SIHD [online]. Strategic Initiative on the Human Dimension. Available from: http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/SIHD.aspx (2017).
39. Jarić, I., G., Cvijanović, J., Knežević-Jarić, and M., Lenhardt. Trends in fisheries science from 2000 to 2009: A bibliometric study. Rev. Fish. Sci., 20(2): 70–79 (2012). doi:10.1080/10641262.2012.659775.
40. Jennings, S., Indicators to support an ecosystem approach to fisheries. Fish Fish., 6(3): 212–232 (2005). doi:10.1111/j.1467-2979.2005.00189.x.
41. Larsen, P. O., and M., von Ins. The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index. Scientometrics, 84(3): 575–603 (2010). doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0202-z.
42. Lorenzen, K., Toward a new paradigm for growth modeling in fisheries stock assessments: Embracing plasticity and its consequences. Fish. Res., 180: 4–22 (2016).
43. Maunder, M. N., P. R., Crone, A. E., Punt, J. L., Valero, and B. X., Semmens. Growth: Theory, estimation, and application in fishery stock assessment models. Fish. Res., 180: 1–3 (2016).
44. Maynou, F., Coviability analysis of western mediterranean fisheries under MSY scenarios for 2020. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 71(7): 1563–1571 (2014). doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsu061.
45. Minto, C., and C., Lordan. GEPETO: Review of mixed fisheries modelling approaches for the Celtic Sea (2014).
46. Möllmann, C., M., Lindegren, T., Blenckner, L., Bergström, M., Casini, R., Diekmann, J., Flinkman, B., Müller-Karulis, S., Neuenfeldt, J. O., Schmidt, M., Tomczak, R., Voss, and A., Gårdmark. Implementing ecosystem-based fisheries management: From single-species to integrated ecosystem assessment and advice for Baltic Sea fish stocks. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 71(5): 1187–1197 (2014). doi:10.1093/icesjms/fst123.
47. Oecd. Main science and technology indicators. Sci. Technol., 2008: 104 (2008).
48. Ostrom, E., A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325(5939): 419–422 (2009). doi:10.1126/science.1172133.
49. Partelow, S., Key steps for operationalizing social–ecological system framework research in small-scale fisheries: A heuristic conceptual approach. Mar. Pol., 51: 507–511 (2015).
50. Piner, K. R., H.-H., Lee, and M. N., Maunder. Evaluation of using random-at-length observations and an equilibrium approximation of the population age structure in fitting the von Bertalanffy growth function. Fish. Res., 180(180): 128–137 (2016).
51. Plagányi, E. E., Models for an ecosystem approach to fisheries. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper, 477. Rome: FAO, pp. 10 (2007).
52. Prellezo, R., P., Accadia, J. L., Andersen, B. S., Andersen, E., Buisman, A., Little, J. R., Nielsen, J. J., Poos, J., Powell, and C., Röckmann. A review of EU bio-economic models for fisheries: The value of a diversity of models. Mar. Pol., 36(2): 423–431 (2012).
53. Quinn, K. M., B. L., Monroe, M., Colaresi, M. H., Crespin, and D. R., Radev. How to analyze political attention with minimal assumptions and costs. Am. J. Polit. Sci., 54(1): 209–228 (2010). doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00427.x.
54. Rehurek, R., and P., Sojka. Software framework for topic modelling with large corpora, pp. 46–50. In: Proceedings of the LREC 2010 Workshop New Challenges for NLP Frameworks. Valletta, Malta: University of Malta. DOI: 10.13140/2.1.2393.1847. ISBN 2-9517408-6-7 (2010).
55. Ricker, W. E., Computation and interpretation of biological statistics of fish populations. Bull. Fish. Res. Board Can., 191: 1–382 (1975).
56. Röder, M., A., Both, and A., Hinneburg. Exploring the space of topic coherence measures. In: Proceedings of the Eighth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, Shanghai, China, pp. 399–408. New York, NY, USA: ACM. ISBN 978-1-4503-3317-7 (2015).
57. Sievert, C., and K., Shirley. LDAvis: A method for visualizing and interpreting topics. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Interactive Language Learning, Visualization, and Interfaces. 63–70 (2014).
58. Simpfendorfer, C. A., and N. K., Dulvy. Bright spots of sustainable shark fishing. Curr. Biol., 27(3): R97–R98 (2017).
59. Srivastava, A., and M., Sahami. Text mining: Classification, clustering, and applications. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press (2009).
60. Stevens, K., P., Kegelmeyer, D., Andrzejewski, and D., Buttler. Exploring topic coherence over many models and many topics. In: Proceedings of the 2012 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning. Association for Computational Linguistics, 952–961 (2012).
61. Syed, S., and M., Spruit. Full-text or abstract? Examining topic coherence scores using latent dirichlet allocation. In: The 4th IEEE International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics. IEEE, 165–174 (2017). doi:10.1109/DSAA.2017.61.
62. Teh, Y. W., D., Newman, M., Welling, and D., Neaman. A collapsed variational bayesian inference algorithm for latent dirichlet allocation. In: NIPS'06 Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, Canada. 1353–1360 MA, USA: MIT Press Cambridge (2006).
63. Turpie, J. K., B. J., Heydenrych, and S. J., Lamberth. Economic value of terrestrial and marine biodiversity in the cape floristic region: Implications for defining effective and socially optimal conservation strategies. Biol. Conserv., 112(1–2): 233–251 (2003).
64. Urquhart, C., An encounter with grounded theory: Tackling the practical and philosophical issues, pp. 104–140. Qual. Res. Inf. Syst.: Issues Trends, (E. M. Trauth, Ed.). Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global (2001). DOI: 10.4018/978-1-930708-06-8.ch005.
65. Wang, C., J., Paisley, and D. M., Blei. Online variational inference for the hierarchical dirichlet process, vol 15, pp. 752–760. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, (G. Gordon, D. Dunson and M. Dudík, Eds.). Proceedings of Machine Learning Research. Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA: PMLR (2011).
66. Yodzis, P., Predator-prey theory and management of multispecies fisheries. Ecol. Appl., 4(1): 51–58 (1994).