Corrigendum: Evidence of fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus velifera) recovery in the Canadian Pacific
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• please read through all the templates before choosing • pick the most relevant text template(s) from the following page and delete all others.• edit the text as necessary, ensuring that the original incorrect text is included for the record, please see the below. • please do not use any extra formatting when editing the templates, and only modify the red text unless absolutely necessary • submit to Frontiers following the instructions on this page.When the original text contained incorrect information, to preserve the scientific record, please include that text when editing the below templates. For example:There was a mistake in the Funding statement, an incorrect number was used. The correct number is "2015C03Bd051.". The publisher apologizes for this mistake.The original version of this article has been updated.In the published article, there was a mistake in the Funding statement. The funding statement for the Key Development Project of the Department of Science and Technology was displayed as "2015CBd051". The correct statement is "Key Development Project of Department of Science and Technology (2015C03Bd051).'' Template continues on the next page ê Corrigendum on: Rannankari, L., Burnham, R., and Duffus, D. (2024). Evidence of fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus velifera) recovery in the Canadian Pacific. Front. Conserv. Sci. 5:1392039. doi: 10.3389/fcosc.2024.1392039 In the published article, there was an error. In the published article, there was a mistake in the population abundance number for fin whales that was reported by Wright et al. 2021, as well as two other text mistakes within the same paragraph.A correction has been made to 4 Population abundance and structure, Paragraph Number 2. This sentence previously stated: "To date, an estimate of population abundance for fin whales in Canadian waters, especially for offshore regions is lacking where fin whales are presumed to be most numerous (COSEWIC, 2019). Dedicated, systematic surveys have estimated the population in BC to be approximately 400-500 individuals (2004-2005 survey, 496 individuals (95% CI: 202-1218) Williams and Thomas, 2007;2004-2008 survey, 446 individuals (95% CI: 263-759) Best et al., 2015). Nichol et al. ( 2018) confirmed this estimate from surveys conducted between 2009 and 2014 (405 individuals (95% CI: 363-469)), complemented using photo-identification to better estimate the number of individuals. These surveys highlighted whale 'hotspots' in Hecate Strait, and Queen Charlotte and Caamano Sounds (Harvey et al., 2017; Figure 1). Sightings interpolated using density surface modeling from the 2018 PRISM survey suggested a total count of 23,692 (95% CI: 19,121-29,356) fin whales for British Columbia from 29 sightings (Wright et al., 2021), far exceeding earlier estimates (see COSEWIC, 2019). Much more of these efforts were given to offshore survey. For the north-coast region, in an area comparable to the earlier work of Best et al. (2015) but ten years later, the model predicted 2,893 fin whales (95% CI: 2,171-3,855, Wright et al., 2021). Each of these dedicated surveys highlighted similar areas of increased whale density in BC."PAGE \* Arabic \* MERGEFORMAT 3The corrected sentence appears below: "To date, an estimate of population abundance for fin whales in Canadian waters, especially for offshore regions is lacking where fin whales are presumed to be most numerous (COSEWIC, 2019). Dedicated, systematic surveys have estimated the population in BC to be approximately 400-500 individuals (2004-2005 survey, 496 individuals (95% CI: 202-1218) Williams and Thomas, 2007;2004-2008survey, 446 individuals (95% CI: 263-759) Best et al., 2015). Nichol et al. (2018) confirmed this estimate from surveys conducted between 2009 and 2014 (405 individuals (95% CI: 363-469)), complemented using photo-identification to better estimate the number of individuals. These surveys highlighted whale 'hotspots' in Hecate Strait, and Queen Charlotte and Caamano Sounds (Harvey et al., 2017; Figure 1). Sightings interpolated using density surface modelling from the 2018 PRISMM survey suggested a total abundance of 2,893 (95% CI: 2171 -3855) fin whales in BC estimated from 235 sightings across two survey strata (Wright et al., 2021). This survey found over six times as many fin whale sightings in the offshore than the north coast stratum and, overall, exceeded earlier abundance estimates (see The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), 2019)"The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.End of template, if you would like to request a correction for a reason not seen here, please contact the journal's Editorial Office
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it