MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009453044 · doi:10.1121/1.4743997

Multibeam sonars: Applications for fisheries research

2001· article· en· W2009453044 on OpenAlexaff
Larry A. Mayer, Yanchao Li, Gary D. Melvin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSonarRemote sensingComputer scienceDemersal zoneBathymetryEnvironmental scienceVisualizationGeologyPelagic zoneOceanographyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multibeam sonars are rapidly becoming a standard tool for seafloor mapping in support of geological, geophysical, and engineering applications. More recently, the ability of multibeam sonars to provide high-resolution, large areal coverage, and potentially quantitative, coregistered, backscatter has been applied very successfully to problems of defining fisheries habitat. While most multibeam sonars are designed to gate out all midwater returns, newly developed systems now allow access to the full data stream and thus offer the possibility of application to studies of pelagic and demersal fisheries. Traditional acoustic approaches to fisheries issues have used single beam echo sounders that sample a relatively small volume of the water column within a survey area. Multibeam sonars provide a mechanism to greatly enhance both the resolution and the area of coverage. When combined with powerful new 3-D visualization techniques, they can offer immediate feedback on fish behavior as well as the critical question of vessel avoidance. If properly calibrated, multibeam sonars can provide the means for much more robust assessment of stock levels and perhaps even species identification.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207