MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164518773 · doi:10.1080/00288330.2001.9516998

Abundance, residency, and habitat utilisation of Hector's dolphins ( <i>Cephalorhynchus hectori</i> ) in Porpoise Bay, New Zealand

2001· article· en· W2164518773 on OpenAlexaff
Lars Bejder, Steve Dawson

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersUniversity of Otago
KeywordsBayPorpoiseAbundance (ecology)PopulationFisheryGeographyHabitatBiologyEcologyOceanographyArchaeologyHarbourDemographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Theodolite tracking and boat‐based photo‐identification surveys were carried out in the austral summers of 1995/96 and 1996/97 to assess abundance, residency, and habitat utilisation of Hector's dolphins (Cephalorhynchus hectori van Beneden 1881) in Porpoise Bay, on the south‐east corner of the South Island of New Zealand. Data are consistent with the model of a small resident population that is visited occasionally by members of neighbouring populations. Mark‐recapture analysis of photographically identified individuals, along with data on the proportion of animals bearing identifying marks, indicates a local population of 48 dolphins (95% CI = 44–55) in 1996/97. Dolphins spent a large proportion of their time in a small area inside the bay. Dolphin sightings were more congregated in successive time periods from early morning to late afternoon. No pattern of diurnal movement into and out of the bay was observed.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations47
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater ResearchSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207