MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901915714 · doi:10.1002/ecy.2566

Movement responses to environment: fast inference of variation among southern elephant seals with a mixed effects model

2018· article· en· W2901915714 on OpenAlexaff
Ian D. Jonsen, Clive R. McMahon, Toby A. Patterson, Marie Auger‐Méthé, Robert Harcourt, Mark A. Hindell, Sophie Bestley

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British ColumbiaFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersAustralian Research CouncilUniversity of TasmaniaMacquarie UniversityCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationVillum Fonden
KeywordsVariation (astronomy)EcologyMovement (music)InferenceMixed modelBiologyGeographyStatisticsComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Like many species, movement patterns of southern elephant seals (Mirounga leonina) are being influenced by long-term environmental change. These seals migrate up to 4,000 km from their breeding colonies, foraging for months in a variety of Southern Ocean habitats. Understanding how movement patterns vary with environmental features and how these relationships differ among individuals employing different foraging strategies can provide insight into foraging performance at a population level. We apply new fast-estimation tools to fit mixed effects within a random walk movement model, rapidly inferring among-individual variability in southern elephant seal environment-movement relationships. We found that seals making foraging trips to the sea ice on or near the Antarctic continental shelf consistently reduced speed and directionality (move persistence) with increasing sea-ice coverage but had variable responses to chlorophyll a concentration, whereas seals foraging in the open ocean reduced move persistence in regions where circumpolar deep water shoaled. Given future climate scenarios, open-ocean foragers may encounter more productive habitat but sea-ice foragers may see reduced habitat availability. Our approach is scalable to large telemetry data sets and allows flexible combinations of mixed effects to be evaluated via model selection, thereby illuminating the ecological context of animal movements that underlie habitat usage.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations201
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcologySame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207