MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036484449 · doi:10.1121/1.1882946

Sound production by North Atlantic right whales (<i>Eubalaena glacialis</i>) in surface active groups

2005· article· en· W2036484449 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Susan E. Parks, Peter L. Tyack

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Defense Science and Engineering GraduateDavid and Lucile Packard Foundation
KeywordsRight whaleBaySound (geography)Sound productionAcousticsGeographyGeologyFisheryOceanographyBiologyWhalePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The surface active group (SAG) is the most commonly observed surface social behavior of North Atlantic right whales. Recordings were made from 52 SAGs in the Bay of Fundy, Canada between July and September, from 1999 to 2002. The call types recorded from these groups were similar to those described previously for Southern right whales (Eubalaena australis), with six major call types being termed scream, gunshot, blow, upcall, warble, and downcall. The percentage of total calls of each call type depended on the group size and composition. The most common call type recorded was the scream call. The scream calls were produced by the focal female in a SAG. Production of other sound types can be attributed to whales other than the focal female, with gunshot and upcalls produced by males, and warble calls produced by female calves. The source levels for these sounds range from 137 to 162 dB rms re 1 ,tPa-m for tonal calls and 174 to 192 dB rms for broadband gunshot sounds.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations147
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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