MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SIZE‐AND AGE‐CLASS SEGREGATION OF BOWHEAD WHALES SUMMERING IN NORTHERN FOXE BASIN: A PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ANALYSIS

2003· article· en· W1971681210 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Mammal Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNunavut Wildlife Management Board
KeywordsBayStructural basinCetaceaGeographyRange (aeronautics)BiologyFisheryArchaeologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract To determine whether Hudson Bay‐Foxe Basin bowhead whales segregate on the basis of age, whales summering in northern Foxe Basin, were aerially photographed in August of 1996, 1997, and 1998. Image lengths on either the negatives or contact prints were measured and total body lengths were estimated. In all three years the majority of whales photographed were ≤13.5 m long. Calves and juveniles made up 89.3%, 96.6%, and 79.3% of the total number of measured whales in 1996 (n = 28), 1997 (n = 30) and 1998 (n = 29) respectively. The number of bowheads >13.5 m, the approximate size at which females reach sexual maturity, that were photographed was directly proportional to the number of calves photographed. Our results indicate that northern Foxe Basin bowheads are part of a more widely distributed stock. Adult males and resting adult females apparently summer in another part of the range, probably northwestern Hudson Bay. Northern Foxe Basin appears to be used as a summer feeding area by cows with young‐of‐the‐year calves and by juveniles.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · 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