MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213230451 · doi:10.1121/1.4799210

Spectral probability density as a tool for marine ambient noise analysis

2013· article· en· W4213230451 on OpenAlexaff
Nathan D. Merchant, Tim R. Barton, Paul M. Thompson, Enrico Pirotta, D. Tom Dakin, John Dorocicz

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of meetings on acoustics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsAmbient noise levelSpectral densityNoise (video)AcousticsComputer scienceUnderwaterGeophoneRemote sensingOutlierProbability density functionSubseaSeismic noiseEnvironmental scienceGeologyTelecommunicationsMarine engineeringSeismologyEngineeringStatisticsArtificial intelligencePhysicsMathematicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The empirical probability density of the power spectral density has been successfully applied as tool to assess signal variability and sensor system performance in the seismic literature. This paper presents the application of this analysis method to underwater ambient noise measurements, and demonstrates its utility in assessing the field performance of passive acoustic monitoring systems and the statistical distribution of noise levels across the frequency spectrum. Using example datasets from an autonomous passive acoustic recorder in the Moray Firth, Scotland, UK, and a cabled subsea observatory in the Strait of Georgia, British Columbia, we show how this method can reveal data limitations such as persistent tonal components and insufficient dynamic range, and phenomena such as bimodality and outliers which may be undetected by standard analysis techniques. We then combine this approach with conventional percentiles and spectral averages, illustrating how the underlying noise level distributions influence these metrics, and propose this technique as a standard, integrative presentation of ambient noise spectra.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of meetings on acousticsSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207