MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2896850074 · doi:10.1121/1.5068268

Localizing bioacoustic signals with long-baseline hydrophone arrays

2018· article· en· W2896850074 on OpenAlexaffabout
Benjamin Hendricks, T. Aaron Gulliver, Janie Wray, Eric M. Keen, Hussein M. Alidina, Chris R. Picard, Hermann Meuter

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsMinistry of ForestsWorld Wildlife Fund CanadaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrophoneBioacousticsBathymetryAcousticsSIGNAL (programming language)Baseline (sea)Remote sensingComputer scienceNoise (video)GeologyEnvironmental scienceOceanographyArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real-time localization and tracking of vocalizing marine mammals is a powerful tool to a) mitigate the risk of ship strikes and disturbance of the animals as well as b) to understand the impact of anthropogenic noise on habitat use of cetaceans. A long baseline hydrophone array has been installed in Squally Channel, a culturally, ecologically, and economically important marine environment in northern British Columbia, Canada. The array consists of four synchronized bottom-mounted hydrophones that permanently record and radio-transmit data to a land-based laboratory. Automated analysis tools have been developed to detect and localize transient bioacoustic signals from three or more hydrophones in real-time. They comprise the correlation of hydrophone signals, the construction of a replica surface using acoustic propagation models, and signal localization from a spatial likelihood surface. An overview of the localization method is presented. We assess spatial localization precision and discuss random and systematic sources of error stemming from the signal type and quality, bathymetry, sound speed profile, as well as the spatial distribution of hydrophones and acoustic sources. Simulation results are compared to field measurements. Based on our findings, challenges and opportunities associated with localization using long baseline arrays in coastal environments are discussed.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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