Bowhead whale localization using time-difference-of-arrival data from asynchronous recorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper estimates bowhead whale locations and uncertainties using nonlinear Bayesian inversion of the time-difference-of-arrival (TDOA) of low-frequency whale calls recorded on onmi-directional asynchronous recorders in the shallow waters of the northeastern Chukchi Sea, Alaska. A Y-shaped cluster of seven autonomous ocean-bottom hydrophones, separated by 0.5-9.2 km, was deployed for several months over which time their clocks drifted out of synchronization. Hundreds of recorded whale calls are manually associated between recorders. The TDOA between hydrophone pairs are calculated from filtered waveform cross correlations and depend on the whale locations, hydrophone locations, relative recorder clock offsets, and effective waveguide sound speed. A nonlinear Bayesian inversion estimates all of these parameters and their uncertainties as well as data error statistics. The problem is highly nonlinear and a linearized inversion did not produce physically realistic results. Whale location uncertainties from nonlinear inversion can be low enough to allow accurate tracking of migrating whales that vocalize repeatedly over several minutes. Estimates of clock drift rates are obtained from inversions of TDOA data over two weeks and agree with corresponding estimates obtained from long-time averaged ambient noise cross correlations. The inversion is suitable for application to large data sets of manually or automatically detected whale calls.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".