MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6939803067 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.19358036

CCES 2018 Final Acoustic Report

2022· other· en· W6939803067 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeaked whaleHuman echolocationSperm whaleWhaleMarine mammals and sonarBioacoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2018 California Current Ecosystem Survey (CCES) was a multidisciplinary survey of the marine ecosystem from southern British Columbia, Canada to northern Baja California, Mexico. CCES 2018 was conducted from 26 June to 4 December 2018 aboard the NOAA ship Reuben Lasker. In this report we present the preliminary results of the passive acoustic monitoring efforts using DASBRs. DASBRs were first used in a broad-scale Passive Acoustics Survey of Cetacean Abundance Levels (PASCAL) in the California Current during 2016, (Keating et al., 2018). Acoustic recordings were analyzed to detect echolocation signals from beaked whales, sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus), and dwarf and pygmy sperm whales (Kogia spp.). In 2016, the most common beaked whale echolocation pulses were from Cuvier’s beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris), Baird’s beaked whale (Berardius bairdii), Stejneger’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon stejnegeri), and two unidentified species of beaked whales whose echolocation pulses were referred to as BW43 and BW39V. Here we present analyses of the DASBR deployments from the CCES 2018 project.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3210.236

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 head0.239
Teacher spread0.195 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→