MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2621462353 · doi:10.1121/1.4987727

The masking of beluga whale (<i>Delphinapterus leucas</i>) sounds by icebreaker noise in the Arctic

2017· article· en· W2621462353 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christine Erbe

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeluga WhaleBelugaArcticBioacousticsNoise (video)Environmental scienceFisheryMarine mammalAmbient noise levelMasking (illustration)AcousticsSound (geography)OceanographyBiologyGeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beluga whales are an Arctic and subarctic cetacean, with an overall “near threatened” conservation status, yet some populations are considered endangered. Apart from threats such as whaling, predation, contamination, and pathogens, underwater noise is of increasing concern. In the early 1990s, Fisheries & Oceans Canada started to fund research on underwater noise emitted by icebreakers and its bioacoustic impacts. In collaboration with the Vancouver Aquarium, beluga whales were trained for masked hearing experiments. Apart from measuring pure-tone audiograms in quiet conditions, animals were trained to listen for beluga vocalizations in different types of noise, including artificially created white noise, naturally occurring thermal ice-cracking noise, and an icebreaker’s propeller cavitation and bubbler system noise. Based on this data, software models for masking in beluga whales were developed. More than 20 years later, this dataset remains the only one on masking in cetaceans using both complex signals (actual vocalizations) and complex noise (actual recordings of Arctic ambient and anthropogenic noise)—highlighting both Dave Farmer’s foresight as well as perhaps his lesser-known escapades into marine mammal bioacoustics.

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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→