Detecting changes in the distribution of calling bowhead whales exposed to fluctuating anthropogenic sounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes an analysis approach designed to detect the effects of fluctuating anthropogenic underwater sound on the distribution of calling bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus) during migration. The anthropogenic sounds in this case were associated with an offshore oil production island (Northstar Island) in the Beaufort Sea northwest of Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, but the method has wider applicability. In autumn, bowhead whales migrate westward at varying distances offshore where some are exposed to Northstar sounds. Anthropogenic effects, if present, were hypothesised to be most pronounced in the southern (proximal) part of the migration corridor. Underwater sound levels were measured continuously ca. 500m from Northstar, and locations of calling whales were determined by a seafloor array of directional acoustical recorders. Weighted quantile regression related the 5th quantile of offshore call distance to anthropogenic sounds and other covariates. Case weights were inversely proportional to both probability of detection and location uncertainty. Due to potential dependencies in call locations, block permutation of uncorrelated whale call clusters was used to assign significance levels to coefficients in the quantile regression model. Statistical model selection was used to determine the anthropogenic sound measures most correlated with the 5th quantile of offshore call distances, after allowing for natural within-season variation quantified by day–night changes, distance of the call east or west of Northstar, and date. Data used to illustrate the method were collected over 29 days in September 2003 and included 25,176 bowhead calls. The estimated offshore distance of the 5th quantile call was 0.67km (95% confidence interval 0.31 to 1.05km) farther offshore when tones associated with Northstar were recorded in the 10–450Hz band during the 15 minutes just prior to each call. The method has been applied successfully to similar data collected near Northstar in other years, and may be useful in other studies that simultaneously collect data on animal locations and fluctuating stimuli.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".