MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2049216917 · doi:10.1121/1.4805912

Arctic ambient noise measurements in support of the Northern Watch Project

2013· article· en· W2049216917 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Garry J. Heard, Nicos Pelavas, Sean Pecknold, Carmen E. Lucas, Bruce Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStarfishAmbient noise levelNoise (video)HydrophoneUnderwaterEnvironmental scienceOceanographyMarine mammalArcticGeologyQUIETAcousticsSound (geography)Computer scienceFisheryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During August 2012, acoustic recording systems were deployed in Barrow Strait as part of the Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) Northern Watch Technology Demonstration Project. Two Starfish Sensor Cubes each with a 1-m cube of seven hydrophones operating in the frequency range of 5–750 Hz, and two single-hydrophone, Autonomous Multichannel Acoustic Recorders (AMAR) providing a 30-kHz signal bandwidth were deployed. The Starfish were deployed for two one-week intervals. One AMAR was deployed for two weeks partially overlapping the Starfish deployment. The second AMAR was deployed for a period of one year with recovery planned for August 2013. The observed underwater noise picture is one of high variability ranging from an extremely quiet to a noisy environment. Noise sources included: A 500-m long iceberg grounded within 500 m of one of the Starfish; a large ice island (4–5 sq-km) that passed within 4 km of the sensors; a small number of motoring vessels; significant wind events that caused rapid and strong variations in the noise field; and a small number of marine mammal detections. After our departure, a large number of Beluga whales were observed visually. The remaining AMAR may detect these late summer visitors.

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)0.001
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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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