Movements and Dive Behaviour of Belugas in Northern Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three adult and three juvenile belugas were fitted with satellite-linked radio tags in eastern Hudson Bay in mid-August 1993, and one adult was tagged in mid-October 1995 in extreme northeastern Hudson Bay. The tags transmitted data on dive behaviour, and the receiving satellite calculated positions by Doppler-shift triangulation. The belugas tagged in summer in eastern Hudson Bay made no directed or long-distance movements while the tags were attached. Their range did not include the Belcher Islands, and belugas observed in aerial surveys of those islands do not appear to belong to the eastern coastal stock. The single beluga tagged in northern Quebec in October moved into the deep water of western Hudson Strait and travelled east along the southern coast of Hudson Strait, slowing up on reaching shallower water off Salluit and near Charles Island. This whale was still off Salluit when the tag stopped transmitting. All the tagged belugas dived intensively while the tags were attached, although there were individual differences, some belugas diving noticeably less than others. Dive behaviour varied over time, with periods lasting several days of concentrated diving interspersed with periods of less intense diving. 'Intense' periods entailed diving for up to 80% of the time. All belugas, even the one that was in deep water in Hudson Strait, showed dive depth characteristics that were consistent with diving usually to the bottom. However, all belugas always - even in deep water - made dives that usually lasted less than 10 min and very seldom lasted more than 12 min. Belugas tagged as pairs of adults and young showed striking correlations of dive behaviour. The data obtained indicate that it would be appropriate to correct aerial surveys by adding 85% to aerial counts.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 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".