Photogrammetry of killer whales using a small hexacopter launched at sea
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional aircraft have been used for photogrammetry studies of free-ranging whales, but are often not practical in remote regions or not affordable. Here we report on the use of a small, unmanned hexacopter (APH-22; Aerial Imaging Solutions) as an alternative method for collecting photographs to measure killer whales (Orcinus orca) at sea. We deployed and retrieved the hexacopter by hand during 60 flights (average duration 13.2 min, max 15.7 min) from the upper deck of an 8.2 m boat, utilizing the aircraft's vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) capability. The hexacopter was quiet and stable in flight, and therefore could be flown at relatively low altitudes without disturbing whales. The payload was a Micro Four-Thirds system camera that was used to obtain 18920 still images from an altitude of 35–40 m above the whales. Tests indicated a ground-resolved distance of <1.4 cm across the full extent of a flat and undistorted field of view, and an onboard pressure altimeter enabled measurements in pixels to be scaled to true size with an average accuracy of 5 cm. As a result, the images were sharp enough to differentiate individual whales using natural markings (77 whales in total) and preliminary estimates resolved differences in whale lengths ranging from 2.6 to 5.8 m. This first application at sea demonstrated the APH-22 hexacopter to be a safe and cost-effective platform for collecting photogrammetry images to fill key scientific data gaps about whales, and we anticipate this utility will extend to studies of other wildlife species.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it