MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1970671447 · doi:10.1121/1.2933959

Killer whales (Orcinus orca) and Bell Laboratories: What can information theory tell us about the communication system of this species

2008· article· en· W1970671447 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kenna D. S. Lehmann, Jason Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation theoryCommunication theoryEcologyRepertoirePopulationCommunications systemComputer scienceTelecommunicationsGeographyAcousticsStatisticsBiologyMathematicsSociologyPhysicsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the 1950's Shannon and Weaver developed information theory as a statistical tool to determine the structure and organization within communication systems. More recently information theory has been applied to the study of animal communication. We gathered acoustic recordings of the Southern Resident killer whales in the inland waters of Washington State, USA, and British Columbia, Canada, from both land based and boat based acoustic arrays. Recorded calls were categorized using the accepted call catalog for this population. In this paper we will present our results from applying various Shannon entropies to the documented call sequences. One notable result is that the call repertoire is more redundant than is ideal to convey the maximum amount of information. This may be a result of their particular social system and behavioral ecology, or may be an indication of the amount of noise present in their acoustic environment. Comparisons will also be made with measures of information theory in other species.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→