MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2094166320 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-57-1-223

Density-dependent habitat selection and the modeling of sperm whale (<i>Physeter macrocephalus</i>) exploitation

2000· article· en· W2094166320 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hal Whitehead

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhalingPelagic zoneSperm whaleFisheryWhalePopulationHumpback whaleHabitatBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The monitoring and management of sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) populations have proved problematic. Studies of living animals indicate that movements are largely determined by resource availability, thus suggesting that density-dependent habitat selection may be a realistic framework within which to study sperm whale populations. A model, in which animals migrate between 2 × 2° squares at rates that depend on relative resource availability, was used to examine the effects of whaling on measures of sperm whale abundance. The model simulated four types of whaling: shore-based whaling, pelagic open-boat whaling by many boats, pelagic whaling by a fleet based around one factory ship, and pelagic whaling by a fleet sequentially exploiting different parts of the study area. Catch per unit effort was found to have little relationship with population size in any part of the study area for shore-based whaling and for pelagic whaling when the study area was sequentially exploited. Thus, in these circumstances, catch per unit effort should not be used as a measure of depletion. To give a reasonable assessment of depletion, visual or acoustic surveys must extend well beyond the areas being exploited.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→