Eastern Temperate North Pacific Offshore Killer Whales (<i>Orcinus orca</i>): Occurrence, Movements, and Insights into Feeding Ecology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Beginning in the late 1980s, large groups of previously unidentified killer whales (Orcinus orca) were sighted off the west coast of Vancouver Island and in the Queen Charlotte Islands, British Columbia. Scientists working in this region produced two killer whale photo-identification catalogues that included both transient (mammal-eating) whales and 65 individual whales that investigators believed represented a distinct killer whale community (Ford et al. 1992, Heise et al. 1993). It was thought that these killer whales maintained a generally offshore distribution and were provisionally termed “offshores”; a term that has since been used as a population identifier for the eastern temperate North Pacific offshore killer whale population. Then in September 1992, 75 unidentified whales entered the Strait of Juan de Fuca just south and east of Victoria, British Columbia (Walters et al. 1992). Although most of these whales had not been seen before, two were matched to killer whales in the Queen Charlotte photo-identification catalogue (Ford et al. 1992, Heise et al. 1993) and were thus listed as “offshore” killer whales. During a similar time period, other large groups of killer whales, previously unidentified, were also being sighted off Alaska and California (Dahlheim et al. 1997; Nancy Black and Alisa Schulman- Janiger, unpublished data, respectively).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".