MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153904796 · doi:10.1139/f02-076

Species identification in deep water using multiple acoustic frequencies

2002· article· en· W2153904796 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
RJ Kloser, Tim Ryan, Pavel Sakov, Alan Williams, J. Anthony Koslow

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPelagic zoneDemersal zoneTrawlingDemersal fishFisherySeamountOceanographyTarget strengthGeologyEnvironmental scienceFish <Actinopterygii>Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multifrequency 12, 38, and 120 kHz acoustics were used to identify the dominant fish groups around a deepwater (>600 m) seamount (a known spawning site for orange roughy, Hoplostethus atlanticus) by amplitude mixing of the frequencies. This method showed three distinct acoustic groupings that corresponded to three groups of fishes based on size and swimbladder type: myctophids of total length less than 10 cm, morids and macrourids with lengths >30 cm, and orange roughy with a mean standard length of 36 cm. These three groups were the dominant groups caught in the demersal and pelagic trawls in the study area. A simple model of swimbladder resonance at depth of large and small gas-filled bladder fish groups is in agreement with our experimental observations. Traditionally, demersal and pelagic trawling is used to identify fish species in acoustic records. However, orange roughy are rarely caught in mid-water owing to net avoidance. Using three frequencies, these groups could be distinguished directly over their entire vertical extent from the acoustic records. This reduces a major source of positive bias uncertainty (factor range of 2.0–6.4) in the orange roughy biomass estimates.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations169
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207