Habitat Choice in Predator‐Prey Systems: Spatial Instability due to Interacting Adaptive Movements
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The role of habitat choice behavior in the dynamics of predator-prey systems is explored using simple mathematical models. The models assume a three-species food chain in which each population is distributed across two or more habitats. The predator and prey adjust their locations dynamically to maximize individual per capita growth, while the prey's resource has a low rate of random movement. The two consumer species have Type II functional responses. For many parameter sets, the populations cycle, with predator and prey "chasing" each other back and forth between habitats. The cycles are driven by the aggregation of prey, which is advantageous because the predator's saturating functional response induces a short-term positive density dependence in prey fitness. The advantage of aggregation in a patch is only temporary because resources are depleted and predators move to or reproduce faster in the habitat with the largest number of prey, perpetuating the cycle. Such spatial cycling can stabilize population densities and qualitatively change the responses of population densities to environmental perturbations. These models show that the coupled processes of moving to habitats with higher fitness in predator and prey may often fail to produce ideal free distributions across habitats.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it