MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3216976743 · doi:10.1121/10.0008309

Echolocation click characteristics of two fish-eating killer whale populations

2021· article· en· W3216976743 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Wladichuk, Jack Lawson, Stan E. Dosso, Jens C. Koblitz

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman echolocationWhaleForagingPopulationMasking (illustration)Marine mammalFisheryEnvironmental scienceFish <Actinopterygii>Noise (video)Ambient noise levelHydrophoneEndangered speciesHabitatAcousticsBiologyEcologySound (geography)PhysicsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acoustic disturbance has been identified as a threat to the survival of the endangered Southern Resident killer whale (SRKW) population whose critical habitat in the Salish Sea overlaps with busy commercial shipping lanes and popular recreational boating areas. Vessel noise has the potential to mask important sounds used by the whales for navigating, communicating, and foraging. To investigate the impact on foraging, acoustic characteristics of the whales’ echolocation clicks must be known. We collected data on SRKW in the wild using a 2 × 2 m2 23-hydrophone array deployed at short ranges (<500 m). We also acquired data on a neighboring population of Northern Resident killer whales (NRKW), whose numbers are increasing. Comparable results were obtained for most parameters between the two populations. Average peak-to-peak apparent source levels were 203 and 196 dB re 1 μPa at 1 m for SRKW and NRKW, respectively. The two populations had similar mean centroid and peak frequencies ranging between 26–29 kHz and 19–21 kHz, respectively. However, root-mean-square bandwidths differed significantly between the populations, with averages of 52 and 39 kHz for SRKWs and NRKWs, respectively. These results will be used to investigate masking potential under varying ambient noise conditions.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.256 · 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→