AN ALGORITHM TO IMPROVE GEOLOCATION POSITIONS USING SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE AND DIVING DEPTH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A bstract The at‐sea movement of marine mammals is an important component of their foraging ecology, but has been difficult to study. Geolocation timed‐data recorders (GLTDRs) estimate positions using measured light level to calculate day length and local noon. It is well known that these location estimates are imprecise (mean error of > 1°). Satellite telemetry generally provides a more accurate, but also more expensive means of monitoring movement. We evaluated the accuracy and precision of geolocation positions by comparing these locations with satellite data from Service Argos for eight free‐ranging gray seals ( Halichoerns grypus ) equipped with both a satellite‐linked data recorder (SDR) and a GLTDR. Geolocation positions differed by 1,026.0 ± 292.28 km from the corresponding Argos locations. We developed an algorithm to correct geolocation positions by comparing surface water temperature (ST) and dive depth collected by GLTDRs with existing sea‐surface temperature and bathymetry databases. The corrected positions were significantly closer (P < 0.025) to the Argos locations of these seals (94.2 ± 8.22 km). The original geolocation positions would have led to incorrect conclusions about the use of space by gray seals; however, the corrected positions can be reliably used to study the large‐scale spatial distribution of individuals.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".