MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140266040 · doi:10.1139/f06-126

A multifrequency method to classify and evaluate fisheries acoustics data

2006· article· en· W2140266040 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J. Michael Jech, William Michaels

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNortheast Fisheries Science CenterNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsClupeaHerringAtlantic herringBackscatter (email)Echo soundingPopulationUnderwaterPelagic zoneFisheryEnvironmental scienceAbundance (ecology)Remote sensingGeologyGeographyOceanographyFish <Actinopterygii>Computer scienceBiologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acoustic surveys have been conducted on Georges Bank from 1998 to present to estimate Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) population abundance. Acoustic data were collected with a 12 or 18, 38, and 120 kHz Simrad EK500 scientific echo sounder. A pelagic trawl and underwater video images were used to collect biological information and to verify the species composition of acoustic backscatter. A multifrequency classification method was developed to improve the efficiency and accuracy of classifying species from acoustic echograms. In this method, a volume backscatter (S v ) threshold was applied equivalently to all echograms, and then a composite echogram was created based on which frequencies had S v greater than or less than the S v threshold. The results of this method were compared with the standard method of visually scrutinizing regions, and metrics were developed to evaluate the accuracy of classification algorithms relative to current methods, as well as to assess the effects of classification methods on population abundance estimates. In general, this method matched visually scrutinized Atlantic herring regions, but with consistent biases in classifying 38 kHz backscatter. The metrics highlighted spatial and temporal changes in the acoustic landscape, which may be indicative of intra- and inter-annual biological changes.

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)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations90
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207