MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3215347871 · doi:10.1121/10.0008311

Recent developments, observations and lessons learned in the use of real-time passive acoustic monitoring from ocean gliders in order to mitigate harm to North Atlantic Right Whales and Southern Resident Killer Whales

2021· article· en· W3215347871 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John Moloney, Katie Kowarski, Stanley B. Martin, Braind Gaudet, Art Cole, Emily Maxner

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGliderThreatened speciesComputer scienceShoreEndangered speciesEnvironmental scienceCorrectnessFalse positive paradoxEnvironmental resource managementOceanographyFisheryRemote sensingGeographyEcologyArtificial intelligenceGeologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

JASCO’s novel passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) system, OceanObserver was deployed in Canada’s Gulf of Saint Lawrence (GoSL) in autumn 2018 aboard a Slocum G3 glider. The purpose of this mission was to assist in the search for endangered North Atlantic Right Whales and other threatened cetaceans, and to report detections in near-real-time so that appropriate mitigation actions could be taken. This proposed presentation will provide results and lessons learned based upon the rigorous analysis and comparison of the real-time, in situ detections with the automated and manual detections derived from post-trial analysis of the recorded raw acoustic data. This post analysis has permitted an assessment of the performance of the automated detectors deployed at sea and the effectiveness of the real-time communication management software in getting marine mammal detections to shore-based stakeholders in a timely manner. It also has permitted the evaluation of the effectiveness of shore-based acoustic analysts tasked with the validation of the automated detections sent to shore.Whether the mission objective of “no false positives” in order to ensure the correctness of mitigation decisions will be discussed. The method of assessing performance will be described and empirical results presented. The application of this technology to SRKW conservation will be discussed.

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)0.008
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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