MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295942892 · doi:10.1061/9780784484401.016

Innovative Collection and Reporting for Marine Mammal Monitoring, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Dry Dock 1

2022· article· en· W4295942892 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander J. Pries, Kari Moore, Ian W. Trefry, Douglas B. Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenuePorts 2022 · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCompetitive and Knowledge Intelligence
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShipyardAuthorizationScrutinyDOCKData collectionMarine conservationComputer scienceEngineeringComputer securityBusinessEnvironmental resource managementShipbuildingEnvironmental scienceMarine engineeringLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marine projects with potential to harass, or injure, marine mammals typically seek authorization from regulatory agencies to allow for incidental take. Monitoring by trained scientists is usually a requirement of these authorizations. For larger projects, this monitoring can generate significant volumes of data to meet regulatory requirements. If these data are not collected or organized well, a project may experience unnecessary delays, shutdowns, or further consultation with the agencies. The expansion of Dry Dock 1 at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine, is a multi-year marine construction project requiring compliance monitoring for potential impacts to marine mammals under several authorizations from NOAA Fisheries. Due to the expectation of large volume of compliance data and scrutiny by the agencies, we developed a secure digital interface for standardized data collection and management to maintain permit compliance. Use of our system improved the time required to enter and review data, run queries for status updates, and prepare summary reports to remain in compliance with project permits and authorizations.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.021

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designNot applicable
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePorts 2022Same topicCompetitive and Knowledge IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207