MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2117445470 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2014-0257

The reaction of a captive herring school to playbacks of a noise-reduced and a conventional research vessel

2014· article· en· W2117445470 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nils Olav Handegard, Alex De Robertis, Guillaume Rieucau, Kevin M. Boswell, Gavin J. Macaulay

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Marine Fisheries ServiceNorges ForskningsrådHavforskningsinstituttet
KeywordsClupeaResearch vesselUnderwaterAtlantic herringNoise (video)FisheryHerringFish <Actinopterygii>Sound pressureAcousticsEnvironmental scienceOceanographyBiologyPhysicsGeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fish avoidance of vessels can bias fisheries-independent surveys. To understand these biases, recordings of underwater radiated vessel noise from a noise-reduced and a conventional research vessel were played back at the same sound pressure levels (SPL) as experienced in situ to Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) in a net pen at two different densities. The noise-reduced vessel recording was also scaled to the same SPL as the conventional vessel to test if characteristics other than SPL affected the reactions. Overall, only weak reactions were observed, but reactions were stronger in the low-density school, in the middle of the pen, and for the scaled silent vessel compared with the conventional vessel. These observations may be attributable to the lack of low frequencies (<50 Hz) in the playbacks, differential motivation for reaction driven by fish density, higher low-frequency noise in the middle of the pen (but lower overall SPL), and characteristics other than SPL. These results call into question the use of SPL as a proxy for fish reaction to vessels as used in standards for construction of research vessels.

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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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