MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3216500393 · doi:10.1121/10.0008432

Vessel noise modelling around the Port of Prince Rupert, British Columbia, and the potential effects on marine mammal listening distance

2021· article· en· W3216500393 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth Ramsey, Graham A. Warner, Alexander O. MacGillivray

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderwaterNoise (video)Ambient noise levelPort (circuit theory)Environmental scienceMarine mammalAcousticsQUIETSound (geography)MeteorologyMarine engineeringOceanographyGeographyGeologyComputer scienceEcologyPhysicsBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Underwater sound was modelled around the Port of Prince Rupert, British Columbia. The waters around the port region contain major international shipping lanes and important habitat for marine species, many of which require a quiet environment. Underwater noise calculations were carried out using JASCO's Acoustic Real-Time Exposure Model for In-motion Sources (ARTEMIS), a cumulative noise exposure and noise mapping model. Vessel traffic for three Periods were modelled using Automatic Identification System (AIS) vessel position reports from 2019: 1 to 31 January, 15 Jun to 15 July, and 15 September to 15 October. Vessel source levels were modelled using the JOMOPANS-ECHO reference spectrum model (MacGillivray and de Jong, 2021). Ambient noise was modelled using the Wind and Rain Ambient Sound Propagation (WRASP) model (Ainslie, 2010). Sound propagation loss was precomputed using the normal mode code, ORCA (Westwood et al., 1996). Vessel traffic projections for 2030 were created with AIS data from 2019 and 2020 to simulate underwater sound levels for 2030. Potential effects on marine mammals was assessed by calculating the relative reduction in distance (listening distance ratios) to which they could communicate, forage, and detect predators due to vessel noise. Listening distance ratios were assessed for 2030 using 2019 as a baseline.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.195 · 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→