Acoustic tracking of fin whales: Habitat use and movement patterns within a Canadian Pacific fjord system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fin whale 20 Hz calls were detected, localized, and tracked using a 10 km aperture network of three acoustic receivers deployed for 11 months in a Pacific Canadian fjord system. The area has been historically important for fin whales and is located along a route that tankers will begin using in 2024. A total of 6712 calls were localized, and trajectories were fitted for 55 acoustic tracks. Fin whale tracks occurred throughout the monitoring site. Call activity peaked in September and was low during winter months. Swimming characteristics varied significantly between day- and nighttime: at night, whales swam faster (7.1 vs 4.0 km/h median, +75.2%), which resulted in longer (+34.7%), less predictable (-70.6%) tracks as compared to daylight hours. Call frequencies varied between 16 and 32 Hz. Beside stereotypical song frequencies, fin whales also used irregular frequency components, which contributed the majority of calls in the summer but did not occur in the winter. The results suggest that the area is primarily used as a summer feeding ground, where fin whales follow a diel behavioral cycle. The observed activity patterns will aid in the assessment of strike risk and harassment mitigation and provide a baseline to document behavioral change.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".