Closed kellijohnson-NOAA closed 1 year ago
I think you are correct Kelli, equilibrium reference points would use "base" values for these (including selectivity). The last five year language is for forecasts. I guess the only time you would mention both like this would be when showing a metric calculated during a forecast year and comparing it to a reference point (i.e., our decision table scenario where we tune F=100%). I'll adjust the language in the table caption in the exec summary and main text.
The executive summary table was correct, so just copied that language to this table. Closed with 43696d6514f2b93fc83cc47ca28fc4891ab83caf
https://github.com/pacific-hake/hake-assessment/blob/7af1d7bcca54bd09fc648e6ce99f7d259c456023/doc/main-tables/main-tables.rnw#L479--L487
I think "Equilibrium reference points were computed using 2018–2022 averages for mean weight-at-age" is wrong but maybe I am confused?