MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987319675 · doi:10.1121/1.3050283

Underwater detection of tonal signals between 0.125 and 100kHz by harbor seals (<i>Phoca vitulina</i>)

2009· article· en· W1987319675 on OpenAlexaff
Ronald A. Kastelein, Paul J. Wensveen, Lean Hoek, Willem C. Verboom, John M. Terhune

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAudiogramPhocaHarbor sealAcousticsPsychoacousticsUnderwaterAudiometerBioacousticsNarrowbandAudiologyQUIETEnvironmental scienceAudiometryGeologyPhysicsBiologyHearing lossTelecommunicationsOceanographyFisheryComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The underwater hearing sensitivities of two 1-year-old female harbor seals were quantified in a pool built for acoustic research, using a behavioral psychoacoustic technique. The animals were trained to respond when they detected an acoustic signal and not to respond when they did not (go/no-go response). Pure tones (0.125-0.25 kHz) and narrowband frequency modulated (tonal) signals (center frequencies 0.5-100 kHz) of 900 ms duration were tested. Thresholds at each frequency were measured using the up-down staircase method and defined as the stimulus level resulting in a 50% detection rate. The audiograms of the two seals did not differ statistically: both plots showed the typical mammalian U-shape, but with a wide and flat bottom. Maximum sensitivity (54 dB re 1 microPa, rms) occurred at 1 kHz. The frequency range of best hearing (within 10 dB of maximum sensitivity) was from 0.5 to 40 kHz (6(1/3) octaves). Higher hearing thresholds (indicating poorer sensitivity) were observed below 1 and above 40 kHz. Thresholds below 4 kHz were lower than those previously described for harbor seals, which demonstrates the importance of using quiet facilities, built specifically for acoustic research, for hearing studies in marine mammals. The results suggest that under unmasked conditions many anthropogenic noise sources and sounds from conspecifics are audible to harbor seals at greater ranges than formerly believed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations79
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207