MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622837557 · doi:10.1121/1.4988630

Passive acoustic localization of fish using a compact hydrophone array

2017· article· en· W2622837557 on OpenAlexaff
Xavier Mouy, Rodney A. Rountree, Francis Juanes, Stan E. Dosso

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrophoneAcousticsUnderwaterFish <Actinopterygii>Computer scienceSIGNAL (programming language)Underwater acousticsInversion (geology)Environmental scienceGeologyPhysicsFisheryOceanographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Passive acoustic monitoring of fish in their natural environment is a research field of growing interest and importance. Although many fish species are soniferous, the characterization and biological understanding of their sounds are largely unknown. Many underwater acoustic recordings contain sounds likely produced by fish, but little information can be extracted from them due to the lack of fundamental knowledge about the behaviors they represent. Deploying small hydrophone arrays can help fill some of these knowledge gaps. Passive acoustic localization using fish calls received on multiple hydrophones can be used to estimate swimming speed, calling rate of individual fish, and source level of their calls. This paper focuses on the three-dimensional localization of fish using a compact array of 6 hydrophones using both simulated and measured data. Fish sounds were detected manually on one of the hydrophones. Time difference of arrivals (TDOAs) were then defined by cross correlating the detected signal with signals from the other hydrophones. Linearized Bayesian inversion was employed to localize fish sounds from the measured TDOAs. Localization uncertainties were below 10 cm inside the hydrophone array. Simulated annealing optimization was used to define the hydrophone configuration that could provide the smallest localization uncertainties.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.252 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207