Two song categories in the Canada Warbler (<i>Cardellina canadensis</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
North American wood-warbler species (Parulidae) studied to date have song systems of one or two categories. Those with two categories use them in different temporal and behavioral contexts, which suggests similar functions across species. We conducted the first detailed analysis of the vocal behavior of a species in the genus Cardellina, the Canada Warbler (C. canadensis). We found that males had two performance-encoded song categories, Mode I and Mode II, and used them in contexts similar to those in which parulids of the genera Vermivora, Mniotilta, and Setophaga use their song categories. Males sang Mode I more often during the day, when unpaired, during early nesting, and when alone or near a female. Males sang Mode II at dawn, after pairing, during the postfledging period, and when near another male. In Mode I, males sang more stereotyped songs more slowly and regularly. In Mode II, males sang more variable songs rapidly, with a more variable rhythm, and chipped frequently between songs. Although each male included phrases in Mode II songs that he did not use in Mode I, the same phrases were used by other males in Mode I, which indicates that song categories were not form-encoded. Unlike Setophaga species with performance-encoded categories, individual males used most (80%) of their phrases in both categories. The song system of the Canada Warbler, two performance-encoded categories without separation of individuals' repertoires into two distinct parts, is unique among parulids studied thus far, and may provide insight into the evolution of parulid repertoire specialization.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".