MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3171275822 · doi:10.1121/10.0004387

Automated tracking of multiple acoustic sources with towed hydrophone arrays

2021· article· en· W3171275822 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pina Gruden, Eva‐Marie Nosal, Erin M. Oleson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrophoneMultilaterationComputer scienceTransectTracking (education)AcousticsProcess (computing)Line (geometry)BioacousticsArtificial intelligenceGeologyOceanographyTelecommunicationsMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Line transect surveys often incorporate a towed hydrophone array to detect and localize marine mammals. The animals are typically tracked based on the estimated time difference of arrivals (TDOAs) of their calls between pairs of hydrophones. The estimated TDOAs or bearings are then tracked through time to obtain animal or group positions, a process often performed manually. This process can be especially challenging in the presence of multiple animal groups that are vocalizing simultaneously, but at the same time do not emit signals consistently through time. In addition, the process is hindered by missed detections and false alarms (false TDOAs). Here, an automated approach to TDOA tracking is outlined, based on a multi-target Bayesian framework, that incorporates target appearance, disappearance, missed detections and false alarms. The method is demonstrated on examples of line transect surveys from Western Canada [Norris et al., J. Acoust. Soc. Am.146, 2805 (2019)] and from Hawaii, USA. [In memory of Thomas F. Norris.]

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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