MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378221664 · doi:10.47536/jcrm.v3i1.905

A note on the release and tracking of a rehabilitated pygmy sperm whale (Kogia breviceps)

2023· article· en· W4378221664 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Scott, Aleta A. Hohn, Andrew J. Westgate, John R. Nicolas, Brent R. Whitaker, Walton B. Campbell

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œjournal of cetacean research and management. Special issue · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsWhaleSperm whaleOceanographySubmarine pipelineFisheryCetaceaMarine mammalGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A stranded, rehabilitated 220cm female pygmy sperm whale was radiotracked from 31 May-4 June 1994 after its release in the Gulf Stream off Cape Canaveral, Florida. The whale moved directly off the continental shelf and headed northward within a corridor bounded by the shelf break and the eastern edge of the Gulf Stream. It moved offshore up to 32 n.miles from the shelf break during the late afternoons and nights and headed back toward the shelf break during the day. The average travelling speed was 3.0kts, and ranged from 0-6kts. Speeds were greatest offshore of the shelf break (4.7kts), where the speed of the Gulf Stream was the greatest, and both travelling speeds and Gulf Stream speeds decreased with distance offshore. The whale did not appear, however, to be drifting passively with the current. Diving duration varied significantly with light levels. The whale made long dives ( > 8min) at night and on overcast days when squid are known to be closer to the surface. During clear days, the whale’s dives were significantly shorter, typically less than five minutes (n = 841). Although these results come from only a single, rehabilitated animal, the four days of data provided the first information on pygmy sperm whale movements and diving behaviour at sea: how its behaviour was influenced by time of day, oceanographic features, and environmental conditions, and how the whale’s surfacing behaviour could allow survey estimates to be adjusted for diving whales missed along the trackline.

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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations36
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œjournal of cetacean research and management. Special issueSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207