Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Many passerine species exhibit a “dawn chorus”—a bout of intense singing activity before or at dawn, but our understanding of this phenomenon is poor. Tyrant flycatchers (Tyrannidae) exhibit pronounced daily bouts of dawn singing. I documented this behavior in several populations of Buff-breasted Flycatchers (Empidonax fulvifrons) in Arizona, tape recording >30,000 songs of 23 individuals during dawn singing. Individual males sang a dawn bout each morning, even during breeding phases when daytime song was almost completely absent. Dawn bouts began 5–10 min before local civil twilight and continued for 25–30 min. Each male possessed two song types delivered at high rates during dawn singing (four times the rate during sustained daytime singing). Song rate varied significantly over the course of dawn bouts, increasing to 55 songs / min at mid-bout, then declining to the end of the bout. Type 2 songs comprised about 30% of songs during dawn singing, and decreased significantly in proportion during the final 10 min of the bout. Songs of the two types were delivered in a nonrandom fashion. Males sang at locations near territory boundaries and pairs of neighbors engaged in counter-singing from the same locations each morning. A number of dawn singing bouts ended with attempted or successful copulations. These observations are consistent with the social dynamics hypothesis for the functional significance of dawn singing in this 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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".