MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2056286183 · doi:10.1121/1.2935385

Comparison of automatic classification methods for beluga whales vocalizations

2008· article· en· W2056286183 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elisabeth Leblanc, Mohammed Bahoura, Yvan Simard

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeluga WhaleBelugaHuman echolocationMarine mammalComputer scienceAcousticsSampling (signal processing)Mel-frequency cepstrumWhaleBioacousticsEnvironmental scienceArtificial intelligenceGeologyFisheryTelecommunicationsOceanographyFeature extraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The beluga whale is a loquacious marine mammal with a complex vocal repertory. It produces a wide variety of whistles and pulsed tones as well as high-frequency echolocation clicks. Automatic detection of the long-distance propagating communication calls are desirable for implementing passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) systems in their environment, for habitat utilisation studies and real-time early warning devices in anthropogenic impact mitigation systems. Signal processing methods were developed to classify beluga vocalizations from a PAM data set recorded in Cap-de-Bon-Désir in the Saguenay-St. Lawrence Marine Park in summer 2003 using a 6-hydrophones array with a 10-100 kHz sampling rate. The performance of an MFCC-based HMM system and a polynomial model applied to extracted time-frequency contours of vocalizations will be evaluated. The feasibility of real-time implementation will then be analysed for both methods.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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