MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2119867517 · doi:10.1109/ut.2011.5774135

Sea observatories and acoustic events: Towards a global monitoring of ocean noise

2011· article· en· W2119867517 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. André, Mike van der Schaar, Serge Zaugg, Ludwig Houégnigan, Antonio M. Sánchez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSound (geography)Marine lifeEnvironmental scienceSubmarine pipelineMarine habitatsOceanographyInvertebrateNavyNoise pollutionHabitatUnderwaterFisheryEcologyGeographyComputer scienceGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The next decades will see increasing levels of offshore industrial development that will lead to increased amounts of noise pollution in the oceans. Amongst these developments, shipping, oil and gas prospection, navy exercises as well as offshore windmills are already playing a leading role in introducing considerable amount of noise in an increasing number of areas. Underwater sound sources produced by these latter activities present the highest intensity amongst those anthropogenically generated in the sea, reaching more than 230 dB re 1 uPa at 1m from the source. These sounds can have physical, physiological and behavioural effects on the marine fauna in the area of action: mammals, reptiles, fish and invertebrates can be affected at various levels depending on the distance to the sound source. Marine mammals could be one of the more sensitive groups of marine species because they have a highly developed auditory system and use sound actively for feeding and for social communication. It is also known that marine mammals are vulnerable to the effects of habitat loss or reduced survival and reproduction rates. The problem faced by the offshore industry, and more generally by the society, is that many economically important activities at sea are at risk because of a lack of information about the effects of anthropogenic sound on marine mammals and especially a lack of available tools to mitigate these effects. The challenge here is to implement technological developments that combine the interests of the industry and the good environmental status of the oceans. Based on the existing technology successfully implemented at underwater observatories worldwide (European Sea-floor Observatories Network of Excellence, ESONET, European Member States; ANTARES, France; NEPTUNE, Canada; Kushiro, Japan) by the Laboratory of Applied Bioacoustics of the Technical University of Catalonia (LIDO, Listen to the Deep-Ocean Environment, http://listentothedeep.com), a real-time passive acoustic monitoring solution is available to monitor ocean noise at large spatial and temporal scales. The LIDO acoustic detection, classification and localization (DCL) system provides continuous information on noise levels and allows the comparative monitoring of noise trends in very diverse geographic locations, as well as relates the presence of key marine species with changing ocean noise.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.250
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→