MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

APPARENT LATERALIZED BEHAVIOR IN GRAY WHALES FEEDING OFF THE CENTRAL BRITISH COLUMBIA COAST

2006· article· en· W2089045468 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Becky L. Woodward, Jeremy P. Winn

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Mammal Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWoods Hole Oceanographic Institution
KeywordsBaleenCetaceaGray (unit)WhalePopulationRight whaleGeographyFisheryBiologyDemographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A digital acoustic recording tag was used to examine the 3‐D orientation of gray whales feeding along the central British Columbia coast. A total of 96 feeding dives were recorded from six different whales. More than half (53.1%) of the whales' bottom time was spent rolled at an angle greater than 45°. Whales rolled an average of 2.9 times per feeding dive, and rolling behavior was often accompanied by a negative pitch angle. Out of 282 recorded rolls, 274 (97.2%) were to the right. Likewise, 98.5% of the total time spent rolled at an angle greater than 45° was spent rolled to the right. The gray whales in this study showed a significant right‐side bias on both an individual (P≤ 0.009) and group level (P < 0.001). Based on the findings of this study and previous reports of uneven baleen wear ( Kasuya and Rice 1970 ), it is proposed that gray whales exhibit a population‐wide right‐side rolling bias similar in character to the 90/10 split of right handedness in humans.

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 score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations54
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Mammal ScienceSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207