MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210716018 · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.13812

Predicting aquatic animal movements and behavioural states from acoustic telemetry arrays

2022· article· en· W4210716018 on OpenAlexafffund
Kim Whoriskey, Henrik Baktoft, Chris Field, Robert J. Lennox, Jonathan Babyn, Ethan Lawler, Joanna Mills Flemming

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in Ecology and Evolution · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKillam Trusts
KeywordsTelemetryBiotelemetryBioacousticsFisheryEnvironmental scienceEcologyBiologyComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Fine‐scale tracking with passive acoustic telemetry can yield great insights into the movement ecology of aquatic animals. To predict fine‐scale positions of tagged animals in continuous space from spatially‐discrete detection data, state‐space modelling through the R package YAPS provides a promising alternative to frequently used positioning algorithms. However, YAPS cannot currently classify multiple kinds of movement that may be used as proxies for individual behaviours of study animals (behavioural states), an endeavour that is of increasing interest to movement ecologists. We advance YAPS by incorporating the functionality to predict behavioural states by using an iterative maximization framework. Our model, which we call YAMS, occurs in continuous time and therefore we adapt current hidden Markov model (HMM) machinery to accommodate this while remaining within a likelihood framework that provides rapid fitting. We test our model using simulations and approximately 6 days’ worth of Northern pike data from Hald Lake, Denmark. YAMS is shown to produce accurate parameter estimates and random effect predictions when model results were compared to simulated data, with behavioural state accuracies of 0.94 and 0.79 for two‐ and three‐state models, respectively, and location state root mean squared errors of 1.8 m for both models. In addition, the behavioural states are shown to reflect varying speeds of the pike, yielding a highly interpretable classification. This research has the potential to be broadly applicable to both ecologists interested in identifying fine‐scale space use and behavioural states from acoustic telemetry data, as well as to statisticians who may wish to use standard HMM machinery to fit continuous‐time HMMs to animal movement data.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in Ecology and EvolutionSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207