Assessing the lethality of ship strikes on whales using simple biophysical models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Studies of ship strikes on whales often focus on large vessels (>20 m), with attention to their speeds and the resulting risk of lethality. Smaller coastal vessels also co‐occur with whales, resulting in collisions that merit study. To cast light on injuries caused by vessels of all sizes, we used knowledge of right whale anatomy and Newtonian mechanics to construct simple models that predict the mechanical stresses experienced by whales during collisions. By comparing our predictions with published models and with data from ship strikes on various whale species, we developed a model for lethal injury as a function of several vessel and whale properties, finding that collisions that create stresses in excess of 0.241 MPa were likely to cause lethal injuries to large whales. Furthermore, this model has revealed that (1) vessels of all sizes can yield stresses higher than this critical level, and (2) large vessels produce stresses much larger than this even when travelling at reduced speeds (i.e., 10 knots). The model is fast enough to power an interactive GUI‐based tool (in R) and flexible enough to simulate strikes by vessels of different masses and speeds upon whales of different species, sizes, and physical conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".