MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622674590 · doi:10.1121/1.4988966

Multibeam sonar water column data processing tools to support coastal ecosystem science

2017· article· en· W2622674590 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Church

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater columnHydrographyBathymetrySonarProfiling (computer programming)Column (typography)Hydrographic surveyEcho soundingRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceData processingComputer scienceOceanographyGeologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multibeam sonar water column data are routinely collected by hydrographic survey vessels to observe and validate minimum depth measurements over anthropogenic submerged objects, which may pose a hazard to navigation. A large volume of additional data is collected during this process but mostly goes unused. This project investigates the development of processing tools and algorithms to automate the extraction of oceanographic and ecological features from the water column data files to enhance the usefulness of these datasets. Sample data from a Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative (GoMRI) project is explored where multibeam data is collected simultaneously with a towed profiling high resolution in situ ichthyoplankton imaging system (with CTD, dissolved oxygen, PAR, and chlorophyll-a fluorescence sensors). The objective is to identify and map spatial and temporal variations in biomass throughout the water column by correlating the acoustic data with imagery and sensor output from the towed profiling system. Processing the dataset to isolate and identify objects and signal patterns of interest, which might normally be considered noise, is investigated. The developed tools will aid in biological and physical feature extraction to further enhance the application of multibeam acoustic water column data.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0060.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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 AmericaSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207