MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378903675 · doi:10.1002/bes2.2085

Taking the Pulse of Changing Phenologies and Biodiversity: The Acoustic Way

2023· article· en· W4378903675 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sylvain Christin, Nicolas Lecomte

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the Ecological Society of America · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsSandpiperCalidrisArcticPloverTundraGeographyEcologyOceanographyBiologyGeologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photo 1. A sample of Arctic species whose calls and songs were annotated in the ArcticBirdSounds database. (A) Two common ravens (Corvux corax—CORA in the dataset) vocalizing while flying. (B) Lapland longspur (Calcarius lapponicus—LALO), one of the most frequent species seen singing in the study sites. (C) Black-bellied plover (Pluvialis squatarola—BBPL) alerting with a closed beak near its nest. (D) Semipalmated sandpiper (Calidris pusilla—SESA) alerting while displaying a rhynchokinesis, a feature made possible thanks to the elasticity in both upper and lower tips of the bill. (E) Baird's sandpiper (Calidris bairdii—BASA) calling during breeding. (F) A vocalizing pair of snow geese (Chen caerulescens—SNGO) attacking an intruder in their territory. (G) A female red phalarope (Phalaropus fulicarius—REPH) calling during a foraging bout in an arctic pond. (H) Long-tailed jaeger (Stercorarius longicaudus—LTJA) calling its partner. Photo credit: Nicolas Lecomte (A–C; E–G); Sylvain Christin (D). Photo 2. Examples of typical high arctic landscapes where the acoustics recorders were set from early spring (top picture) to the end of the breeding summer (middle image). The bottom left image shows the acoustic recorder before setting it in its protective casing (bottom middle image). The bottom left image illustrates a simple and concealed placement of a recorder pointed by the white arrow. Photo credit: Nicolas Lecomte and Sylvain Christin (bottom right image only). Photo 3. Example of an annotated arctic chorus with calls and songs of four different tundra species: (a) the lapland longspur (Calcarius lapponicus—LALO in the dataset), (b) the ruddy turnstone (Arenaria interpres—RUTU), (c) the pectoral sandpiper (Calidris melanotos—PESA), and (d) the dunlin (Calidris alpina—DUNL). This summary figure of separate and overlapping acoustic signals is called a spectrogramm and captures time (0.1 seconds, s) in the x-axis, sound frequencies (in Khz) in the y-axis, and intensity (in dB) in a color scheme. The cloud of points close to the minimum frequency are typical of outdoor recordings that usually capture ambient noise. Photo credit: Nicolas Lecomte. These photographs illustrate the article “ArcticBirdSounds: An open-access, multiyear, and detailed annotated dataset of bird songs and calls” by Sylvain Christin, Christine Chicoine, Tommy O'Neill Sanger, Mélanie F. Guigueno, Jannik Hansen, Richard B. Lanctot, Douglas MacNearney, Jennie Rausch, Sarah T. Saalfeld, Niels M. Schmidt, Paul A. Smith, Paul F. Woodard, Éric Hervet, and Nicolas Lecomte published in Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.4047

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of the Ecological Society of AmericaSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207