MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389102388 · doi:10.1121/10.0023172

Natural soundscape variation appears to influence the structure of stereotypic calls and repertoires in killer whales

2023· article· en· W4389102388 on OpenAlexaff
Harald Yurk, Caitlin O’Neill, L. S. Quayle, Svein Vagle, Holly T. LeBlond

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoundscapeAmbient noise levelWhaleAcousticsVariation (astronomy)QUIETNoise (video)UnderwaterNatural soundsNatural (archaeology)BioacousticsHabitatPopulationSound (geography)EcologyBiologyGeologyComputer scienceOceanographyPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Underwater soundscapes show dynamic variations in natural ambient sound levels at different locations and water depths and levels can vary over a course of a day. This soundscape dynamicity may pose a vocal challenge for highly mobile marine mammals whose habitat overlaps with many dynamic soundscapes. The most prominent communication tool of killer whales is a pulsated often multicomponent call which can be detected at more than 15 kilometers under quiet conditions. Social learning of call structure is a driver for stereotypic long lasting group- or population-specific call repertoires. Here we describe the potential vocal adaptations of killer whales to reduce the influence of sound propagation loss (PL) on their calls. Reliable propagation to identify groups and populations at considerable distances is important. In experimental field trials, the PL of killer whale calls and that of tones and sweeps was examined to determine if call component PL differs among soundscapes. PL is positively correlated with spatial and temporal ambient noise level variation. Furthermore, the use of burst pulses, a common feature of calls increased propagation distances at higher noise levels. We conclude that noise variation is one of the drivers of call structure and may also influence the call repertoire size.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→