MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393803282 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.10056549

Systematic literature review of acoustic individual identification (AIID)

2024· dataset· en· W4393803282 on OpenAlexaff
Elly C. Knight, Tessa A. Rhinehart, Devin R. de Zwaan, Matthew J. Weldy

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsMount Allison UniversityAlberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)BiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Citations and characteristics of manuscripts considered relevant to acoustic individual identification (AIID). To be included in the review, at minimum a paper was required to: 1) Use recorded vocalizations, regardless of the method, and 2) attempt to differentiate individuals by vocal signature as an objective or as a step towards more advanced application of acoustic IID. Detailed methods are available in the "AIIDLiteratureReviewMethods.docx".

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.152
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.152
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.010
Bibliometrics0.0420.045
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0700.011

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207