Characteristics of whistles from the acoustic repertoire of resident killer whales (<i>Orcinus orca</i>) off Vancouver Island, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The acoustic repertoire of killer whales (Orcinus orca) consists of pulsed calls and tonal sounds, called whistles. Although previous studies gave information on whistle parameters, no study has presented a detailed quantitative characterization of whistles from wild killer whales. Thus an interpretation of possible functions of whistles in killer whale underwater communication has been impossible so far. In this study acoustic parameters of whistles from groups of individually known killer whales were measured. Observations in the field indicate that whistles are close-range signals. The majority of whistles (90%) were tones with several harmonics with the main energy concentrated in the fundamental. The remainder were tones with enhanced second or higher harmonics and tones without harmonics. Whistles had an average bandwidth of 4.5 kHz, an average dominant frequency of 8.3 kHz, and an average duration of 1.8 s. The number of frequency modulations per whistle ranged between 0 and 71. The study indicates that whistles in wild killer whales serve a different function than whistles of other delphinids. Their structure makes whistles of killer whales suitable to function as close-range motivational 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".