MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1924726652 · doi:10.1121/1.4933895

Seemingly simple songs: Black-capped chickadee song revisited

2015· article· en· W1924726652 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher B. Sturdy

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSongbirdDominance (genetics)Vocal communicationPerspective (graphical)Animal communicationBiologyZoologyCommunicationEcologyPsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our lab has been studying songbird communication from an integrative perspective for over 13 years. A significant part of this program involves conducting bioacoustic analyses of vocalizations that are critical to survival. Initially, black-capped chickadees and their chick-a-deecall were our main research focus. In more recent years, we have turned our attention back to the fee-bee song, intensely studied by Weisman, Ratcliffe, and colleagues. Our re-examination of the fee-bee song revealed several, previously unreported features of this seemingly acoustically simple vocalization. We showed that songs contain regionalized cues for dominance status, and that females respond differentially to dominant song playback irrespective of their geographic origin. Moreover, females themselves produce a fee-bee song not previously reported in the literature. Female song is acoustically distinct from male song, and we have used operant conditioning experiments to identify features that can be used to identify sex of the singer. Finally, we have begun to explore neural response to different vocalizations, including song, and found that responses vary by singer, listener, and vocalization type. Our current efforts are aimed at unraveling the acoustic basis of communication in this nearly ubiquitous North American species.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207