MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975671934 · doi:10.1121/1.4773596

Generalized marine mammal detection based on improved band-limited processing

2012· article· en· W1975671934 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin B. Bougher, Joey Hood, James A. Theriault, Hilary B. Moors

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of meetings on acoustics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSpectrogramSignal processingWeightingMinke whaleMarine mammalNoise (video)DetectorWorkstationArray processingReal-time computingArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Computer hardwareWhaleDigital signal processingTelecommunicationsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Akoostix continues to experiment with flexible, low-processing-load marine mammal detection options suitable for implementation in both workstations and low-power embedded systems. Building on previous work, additional processing stages have been added to normalize and de-noise spectrograms using a wide variety of user-configurable options. These pre-processing options can be optimized for the signals of interest, which enhances targets while significantly reducing the impact of structured noise that cause false alarms with other methods. Band-limited signal excess is then computed using one of several weighting functions, after which detection is performed on the signal excess time series. Out-of-band tests are also performed to ensure band-limited signals. The detector is tested on the workshop Minke whale localization dataset with configurations of varying complexity and performance (detection and processing load) are compared to other detection algorithms.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of meetings on acousticsSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207