Model-informed classification of broadband acoustic backscatter from zooplankton in an <i>in situ</i> mesocosm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Classification of zooplankton to species with broadband echosounder data could increase the taxonomic resolution of acoustic surveys and reduce the dependence on net and trawl samples for ‘ground truthing’. Supervised classification with broadband echosounder data is limited by the acquisition of validated data required to train machine learning algorithms (‘classifiers’). We tested the hypothesis that acoustic scattering models could be used to train classifiers for remote classification of zooplankton. Three classifiers were trained with data from scattering models of four Arctic zooplankton groups (copepods, euphausiids, chaetognaths, and hydrozoans). We evaluated classifier predictions against observations of a mixed zooplankton community in a submerged purpose-built mesocosm (12 m3) insonified with broadband transmissions (185–255 kHz). The mesocosm was deployed from a wharf in Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard, during the Arctic polar night in January 2022. We detected 7722 tracked single targets, which were used to evaluate the classifier predictions of measured zooplankton targets. The classifiers could differentiate copepods from the other groups reasonably well, but they could not differentiate euphausiids, chaetognaths, and hydrozoans reliably due to the similarities in their modelled target spectra. We recommend that model-informed classification of zooplankton from broadband acoustic signals be used with caution until a better understanding of in situ target spectra variability is gained.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".