MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2011698479 · doi:10.1121/1.3075598

Off-axis effects on the multi-pulse structure of sperm whale coda clicks

2009· article· en· W2011698479 on OpenAlexafffund
Tyler M. Schulz, Hal Whitehead, Luke Rendell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNatural Environment Research CouncilKillam TrustsInternational Fund for Animal Welfare
KeywordsCodaSperm whaleAcousticsHuman echolocationHydrophoneWhalePulse (music)BioacousticsWaveformReflection (computer programming)GeologyPhysicsBiologyComputer scienceOpticsTelecommunicationsFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) clicks have a multi-pulse structure, a result of the reflection of sound energy between air sacs in the spermaceti organ. Although previous research revealed that usual clicks (used for echolocation) recorded away from a vocalizing whale's longitudinal axis have waveforms with poorly defined pulse structures, it has been unknown whether sperm whale coda clicks (used for communication) show similar off-axis effects. To address this knowledge gap, a hydrophone array was used to localize vocalizing sperm whales, and the waveforms of coda clicks recorded from different aspects were examined. Coda clicks recorded close to the whale's acoustic axis showed well-defined multi-pulsed waveforms, while those recorded off-axis did not. As for usual clicks, this suggests that sound energy radiates directly into the water upon reflection off the frontal sac.

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 score0.005

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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