MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2149051515 · doi:10.1139/f05-178

Heterogeneity and the markrecapture assessment of the Scotian Shelf population of northern bottlenose whales (<i>Hyperoodon ampullatus</i>)

2005· article· en· W2149051515 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hal Whitehead, Tonya Wimmer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationMark and recaptureFisheryGeographyCanyonHabitatPopulation modelSubmarine canyonEcologyPopulation sizeBiologyCartographyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A population of northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus) inhabits the waters along the edge of the Scotian Shelf. The most important habitat of this population is the Gully, a large submarine canyon, where animals were photographically identified between 1988 and 2003. Open mark–recapture models, including mixture models that allow for heterogeneity in identifiability and (or) mortality among individuals, were fitted to identification-history data. Models without heterogeneity in identifiability had poor fit to the data and underestimated population size. The population is estimated to contain about 163 animals (95% confidence interval 119–214), with no statistically significant temporal trend. About 12% of the population has a high probability of being identified within the Gully in any year. Many of them are mature males. The remainder is less likely to be identified in the Gully during any year, spend generally shorter periods in the Gully even in years when they are found, and are more likely to be female. This and other work indicate a poorly mixed population inhabiting the canyons and other deeper waters off the Scotian Shelf. Non parametric bootstrap methods were used to validate the estimation procedure and to estimate the efficiency of future fieldwork scenarios.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations21
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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