MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4287147841 · doi:10.1002/zoo.21722

The use of infrared thermography to noninvasively measure the surface temperature of polar bears during bouts of social play

2022· article· en· W4287147841 on OpenAlexafffund
Paige B. Bissonnette, Jane M. Waterman, Stephen D. Petersen

Bibliographic record

VenueZoo Biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersMitacsChurchill Northern Studies Centre
KeywordsThermographyProxy (statistics)Energy expenditureInfraredUrsus maritimusPolarThermalBiologyStatisticsOpticsPhysicsEndocrinologyMeteorologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infrared thermography or thermal imagery is a noninvasive tool that can be used to measure the temperature of surfaces. Typically, thermal imagery is used for construction or military purposes but is increasingly used as a noninvasive tool in wildlife studies. We investigated the use of thermal imagery to measure surface temperature changes as a proxy for energetic expenditure. We measured the surface temperature of polar bear (Ursus maritimus) eyes, while immobilized, to determine whether the eye is a thermal window that can accurately indicate internal temperature. We found a significant difference (2.68 ± 0.41°C) between the surface temperature of the eye measured with thermal imagery and the internal rectal temperature. Additionally, we measured surface temperature changes in polar bears after bouts of social play as a proxy for energy expenditure. Mean temperature of the eye increased by 1.34 ± 0.43°C after social play, indicating that this activity increased energy expenditure. During the fasting season, polar bears rely on fat stores, and any energy expenditure beyond what is required to travel may be costly to their survival, particularly in years of low resource availability. We conclude that thermal imagery is a useful tool to noninvasively investigate the energetics of social play.

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)0.000
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 score0.457
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZoo BiologySame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207