MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

VOCAL INDIVIDUALITY OF IN‐AIR WEDDELL SEAL (<i>LEPTONYCHOTES WEDDELLII</i>) PUP “PRIMARY” CALLS

2006· article· en· W2141034993 on OpenAlexafffund
Kym Collins, John M. Terhune, Tracey L. Rogers, Kathryn E. Wheatley, Robert Harcourt

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Mammal Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersAustralian Antarctic DivisionAustralian Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAntarctica New ZealandLinnean Society of NSWSociety for Marine Mammalogy
KeywordsDiscriminant function analysisZoologyBiologyFur sealPsychologyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As a result of selective pressures faced during lactation, vocal recognition may play a crucial role in maintaining the phocid mother–pup bond during the period of dependence. To investigate this possibility, we examined whether Weddell seal (Leptonychotes weddellii) pups produce individually distinctive “primary” calls. One temporal, nine fundamental frequency features, and two spectral characteristics were measured. A discriminant function analysis (DFA) of 15 Vestfold Hills pups correctly classified 52% of calls, while the cross‐validation procedure classified 29% of calls to the correct pup. A second DFA of 10 known‐age McMurdo Sound pups correctly classified 44% of “test” calls. For novel calls, the probabilities of attaining such classification rates by chance are low. The relationship between age and call stereotypy indicated that pups 2 wk and older may be more vocally distinctive. Overall, findings suggest that Weddell seal pup “primary” calls are moderately distinctive and only exhibit sufficient stereotypy to aid maternal recognition by approximately two weeks of age.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations32
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Mammal ScienceSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207