MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170675123 · doi:10.1121/10.0004637

Quantifying ship noise in the marine soundscape of the western Canadian Arctic

2021· article· en· W3170675123 on OpenAlexaffabout
William D. Halliday, Stephen J. Insley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsWildlife Conservation Society Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticSoundscapeNoise (video)Environmental scienceUnderwaterOceanographyAcousticsSound (geography)Ambient noise levelMeteorologyMarine engineeringComputer sciencePhysical geographyGeologyGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Arctic soundscape is naturally quite complex, but many parts of the Arctic have also historically had very low levels of ship noise. However, ship traffic is increasing throughout the Arctic, which is likely leading to increased levels of underwater noise, causing changes in this soundscape. In this study, we thoroughly quantified ship noise in passive acoustic data collected at 10 sites in the western Canadian Arctic between 2014 and 2020, with data collected from between one and three years at each site. We paired the acoustic data with automatic identification system ship data to collect information on the individual ships creating noise. We quantified the presence of ship noise within all of the acoustic data, statistically examined the influence of different static and dynamic ship variables on sound levels, and estimated source levels of ships that traveled close to the acoustic recorder. These analyses represent the first detailed examination of ship noise in this region of the Arctic, and the results provide valuable information for future soundscape studies, as well as relevant information for the management of ship noise in the Arctic.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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