| cmp_id | label | status | estimator | hcr | indices | reference_years | window_years | metric | output | min | lim | trigger | target | initial | dlow | dupp | implementation | primary_source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MP29 | HS+20 | advanced candidate | cpues.ind | hockeystick.hcr | Chile_AcousN + Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 270 | 0.1 | 2.120000 | 2000 | 1385 | 0.85 | 1.20 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE model_tune.R and model_robustness.R |
| MP43 | HS-20 | comparison case | cpues.ind | hockeystick.hcr | Chile_AcousN + Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 270 | 0.1 | 3.062500 | 2000 | 1385 | 0.80 | 1.15 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE tune_candidate_change_limits.R |
| MP45 | HSsym | comparison case | cpues.ind | hockeystick.hcr | Chile_AcousN + Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 270 | 0.1 | 3.062500 | 2000 | 1385 | 0.85 | 1.15 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE candidate_change_limit_mps.csv and tune_candidate_change_limits.R |
| MP47 | HS-30 | comparison case | cpues.ind | hockeystick.hcr | Chile_AcousN + Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 270 | 0.1 | 3.062500 | 2000 | 1385 | 0.70 | 1.20 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE candidate_change_limit_mps.csv and tune_candidate_change_limits.R |
| MP32 | PR+20 | advanced candidate | cpues.ind | powerramp.hcr | Chile_AcousN + Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 270 | 0.1 | 1.420000 | 1500 | 1385 | 0.85 | 1.20 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE model_tune.R and model_robustness.R |
| MP44 | PR-20 | comparison case | cpues.ind | powerramp.hcr | Chile_AcousN + Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 270 | 0.1 | 1.914062 | 1500 | 1385 | 0.80 | 1.15 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE tune_candidate_change_limits.R |
| MP46 | PRsym | comparison case | cpues.ind | powerramp.hcr | Chile_AcousN + Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 270 | 0.1 | 1.937500 | 1500 | 1385 | 0.85 | 1.15 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE candidate_change_limit_mps.csv and tune_candidate_change_limits.R |
| MP48 | PR-30 | comparison case | cpues.ind | powerramp.hcr | Chile_AcousN + Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 270 | 0.1 | 1.890625 | 1500 | 1385 | 0.70 | 1.20 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE candidate_change_limit_mps.csv and tune_candidate_change_limits.R |
| MP18 | MP18 | comparison case | cpues.ind | hockeystick.hcr | Chile_AcousN + Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 0 | 0.0 | 5.796875 | 5000 | 1385 | 0.85 | 1.20 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE candidate_mps.csv and model_tune.R |
| MP24 | MP24 | comparison case | cpues.ind | hockeystick.hcr | Chile_AcousN + Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 0 | 0.0 | 1.512500 | 1750 | 1385 | 0.85 | 1.20 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE candidate_mps.csv and model_tune.R |
| MP31 | MP31 | comparison case | cpues.ind | hockeystick.hcr | Chile_AcousN + Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 270 | 0.3 | 1.984375 | 2000 | 1385 | 0.85 | 1.20 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE candidate_mps.csv and model_tune.R |
| MP23 | MP23 | comparison case | cpues.ind | slope.hcr | Chile_AcousN + Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 5 | mean | catch | 0 | 0.0 | NA | NA | 1385 | 0.85 | 1.20 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions; slope 821.875 | jmMSE candidate_mps.csv and model_tune.R |
| MP35 | MP35 | comparison case | cpues.ind | powerramp.hcr | Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 270 | 0.1 | 1.492188 | 1500 | 1385 | 0.85 | 1.20 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE candidate_mps.csv and model_tune.R |
| MP36 | MP36 | comparison case | cpues.ind | hockeystick.hcr | Chile_CPUE + Peru_Artis + Peru_Ind + Offshore_CPUE | 2019-2023 | 3 | mean | catch | 270 | 0.1 | 2.218750 | 2000 | 1385 | 0.85 | 1.20 | split.is using last-5-year catch proportions | jmMSE candidate_mps.csv and model_tune.R |
CMP registry
Candidate Management Procedure Registry
1 Meaning of the status labels
| Status | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Test candidate | Defined sufficiently for testing; not shortlisted or adopted. |
| Comparison case | Included to isolate an important assumption or design choice; not an advanced or adopted procedure. |
| Advanced candidate | Selected in the current analysis for robustness testing; formal status not yet confirmed. |
| Shortlisted | Retained by the working group for formal comparative evaluation. |
| Recommended | Supported by a documented working-group recommendation. |
| Adopted | Formally adopted through the applicable SPRFMO process. |
| Retired | Kept in the historical record but no longer under active consideration. |
The primary registry comes from the current approved working version of jmMSE. HS+20 (MP29) and PR+20 (MP32) are the advanced candidates. Twelve additional CMPs are registered as comparison cases so scientists can examine the effects of target catch, limit, rule shape, index set, and annual change limits. The current Slick file contains ten of the fourteen registered CMPs; the four added annual-limit variants can be included when that Slick result set is rebuilt. None of the comparison cases has been advanced or adopted. The earlier robustness-testing script selected tun29 and tun32, and the 25 July 2026 presentation describes MP29 as a potentially good candidate and MP32 as the optimal powerramp run. They are advanced candidates, not adopted procedures.
2 Working-label convention
The label column uses the concise convention from the SC14 MSE report when a CMP belongs to the retuned annual-change comparison. HS means hockey-stick and PR means power ramp. +20 denotes the base 20% maximum increase, -20 the reverse asymmetry with a 20% maximum decrease, sym symmetric 15% limits, and -30 a 30% maximum decrease. The immutable cmp_id column retains the legacy identifier used by code and saved results.
CMPs outside this convention keep their existing MPxx label. Thus the registry and downstream exports do not invent a descriptive name where no agreed convention exists.
3 Candidate pages
- MP29: empirical all-index estimator plus hockeystick HCR.
- MP32: empirical all-index estimator plus power-ramp HCR.
- Trial and robustness run reference: the full set of tuning trials and the operating models used to test MP29 and MP32.
The current Slick comparison also includes HS-20 (MP43), PR-20 (MP44), MP18, MP24, MP31, MP23, MP35, and MP36. The registry additionally contains HSsym (MP45), PRsym (MP46), HS-30 (MP47), and PR-30 (MP48). These are clearly labelled as comparison cases rather than advanced or adopted procedures.
4 How these candidates were developed
The jmMSE analysis tested alternative target catches, minimum catches, limit values, harvest control rules, and ways of calculating the stock indicator.
| Run | Role in development | July presentation interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| MP16 | Hockeystick, target 2000, no minimum/limit | Potential candidate before minimum/limit refinement |
| MP25 | Powerramp, target 1500, no minimum/limit | Potential candidate before minimum/limit refinement |
| MP29 | Hockeystick with minimum 270 and limit 0.1 | Optimal hockeystick run; advanced to robustness tests |
| MP32 | Powerramp with minimum 270 and limit 0.1 | Optimal powerramp run; advanced to robustness tests |
| MP35-40 | CPUE-only, shortcut-assessment, and perfect-information variants | Tests of how the source of stock information affects results |
| MP41-42 | 500-replicate versions of the MP29/MP32 designs | Test of whether the number of simulation replicates affects results; not separate CMPs |
| MP43-44 | Retuned MP29/MP32 structures with a 20% maximum decrease and 15% maximum increase | Comparison cases that isolate the effect of reversing the annual change limits |
The earlier SCW17/Paper-09 rows are retained in source history as workshop test proposals. They are not the primary candidate list for this site.
5 Points to keep in mind
min,target, andinitialare catch quantities in the current code and presentation.limandtriggerare values on the relative-index scale. Final catch units must be stated before adoption.dlowanddupplimit the decrease and increase in catch advice from one year to the next.- Index names match
model_tune.Rexactly. - Each trigger was tuned so that the probability of being in the Kobe green zone (
SB0green: spawning biomass above \(SB_{MSY}\) and fishing mortality below \(F_{MSY}\)) was 0.60 over 2041-2050 in the reference analysis. The resulting trigger is part of the candidate definition and should not be recalculated during annual application. - MP43 reached 0.606 at trigger 3.0625 and MP44 reached 0.603 at trigger 1.9140625, within the tuning tolerance of 0.01.
6 Requirements before changing a candidate’s status
A candidate can move beyond test status only when it has a completed specification, repeatable performance results, a calculation test using saved inputs, and a decision record identifying the approving body and date.