MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W602568408 · doi:10.21236/ada616547

Quantifying the Effects of Propagation on Classification of Cetacean Vocalizations

2014· report· en· W602568408 on OpenAlexaff
Paul C. Hines, Carolyn M. Binder

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To develop a robust automatic classifier with a high probability of detection and a low false alarm rate that can classify vocalizations from a variety of cetacean species in diverse ocean environments. OBJECTIVESIn previous work as part of ONR grant N000141210139 a unique automatic classifier developed by the PI that uses perceptual signal features -features similar to those employed by the human auditory system-was employed to successfully classify anthropogenic transients, and vocalizations from five cetacean species.Although this is a significant achievement, successful implementation of this (or any) classifier requires that it be temporally and spatially robust.The primary goal will be to address the question: "Will it work on vocalization data from these species collected under different environmental conditions?"To examine this, discriminant analysis will be used to rank the aural features in terms of their ability to separate the vocalizations between species.Then, the more highly ranked features will be tested for robustness.This will be done by performing a propagation experiment using cetacean vocalizations and synthetically generated calls as source signals, and testing the received signals with the classifier.The measurements will be complemented by comparing experimental results to propagation model results with the goal of generalizing the results to other ocean environments. APPROACH

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→