MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Automated identification system for ships data as a proxy for marine vessel related stressors

2022· article· en· W4312082687 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrick D. O’Hara, Norma Serra-Sogas, Lauren McWhinnie, Kim Pearce, Nicole Le Baron, Gregory O’Hagan, Andrea Nesdoly, Tunai Porto Marques, Rosaline Canessa

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Science of The Total Environment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaTransport CanadaOcean Networks Canada SocietyUniversity of Victoria
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaMarine Environmental Observation Prediction and Response Network
KeywordsAutomatic Identification SystemNegative binomial distributionShoreProxy (statistics)Identification (biology)Environmental scienceRemote sensingComputer scienceGeographyStatisticsData miningOceanographyGeologyEcologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An increasing number of marine conservation initiatives rely on data from Automatic Identification System (AIS) to inform marine vessel traffic associated impact assessments and mitigation policy. However, a considerable proportion of vessel traffic is not captured by AIS in many regions of the world. Here we introduce two complementary techniques for collecting traffic data in the Canadian Salish Sea that rely on optical imagery. Vessel data pulled from imagery captured using a shore-based autonomous camera system ("Photobot") were used for temporal analyses, and data from imagery collected by the National Aerial Surveillance Program (NASP) were used for spatial analyses. The photobot imagery captured vessel passages through Boundary Pass every minute (Jan-Dec 2017), and NASP data collection occurred opportunistically across most of the Canadian Salish Sea (2017-2018). Based on photobot imagery data, we found that up to 72 % of total vessel passages through Boundary Pass were not broadcasting AIS, and in some vessel categories this proportion was much higher (i.e., 96 %). We fit negative binomial General Linearized Models to our photobot data and found a strong seasonal variation in non-AIS, and a weekend/weekday component that also varied by season (interaction term p < 0.0001). Non-AIS traffic was much higher during the summer (Apr-Sep) and during the weekend (Sat-Sun), reflecting patterns in recreational vessel traffic not obligated to broadcast AIS. Negative binomial General Additive Models based on the NASP data revealed strong spatial associations with distance from shore (up to 10 km) and non-AIS vessel traffic for both summer and winter seasons. There were also associations between non-AIS vessels and marina and anchorage densities, particularly during the winter, which again reflect seasonal recreational vessel traffic patterns. Overall, our GAMs explained 20-37 % of all vessel traffic during the summer and winter, and highlighted subregions where vessel traffic is under represented by AIS.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.251
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations23
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Science of The Total Environment→Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→