STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PULSED CALLS OF LONG-FINNED PILOT WHALES<i>GLOBICEPHALA MELAS</i>
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The pulsed calls of Long-finned Pilot Whales Globicephala melas have received little study, and their structure and function remain unclear. We examined the pulsed calls of Pilot Whales off Nova Scotia by taking multiple measures of 419 spectrograms from recordings made over a span of eight years. The results offer a quantitative description of pulsed call structure necessary for subsequent analysis of signal functionality and social relevance. Pilot Whale pulsed calls were found to be physically complex, with multiple, independently modulated components that are likely rich in information and difficult for eavesdroppers to imitate. The production of such structurally complicated signals suggests they play an important role in Pilot Whale communication. The pulsed calls appear to form two main call types: those with a maximum visible sideband above 18 kHz and those with a maximum visible sideband below 15 kHz. However, there is no indication of further discrete categories despite a large amount of variation between calls within those two broad categories. The high variation in call structures may indicate communicative plasticity, allowing the whales to communicate state, such as level of arousal, and to compensate for variable background noise levels. The structural similarity of Pilot Whale and Killer Whale Orcinus orca pulsed calls raises the question of whether the distantly related whale species, with a shared but rare social structure, have evolved similar call structures to solve similar communication challenges.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it