MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975988972 · doi:10.1121/1.3277247

Black-capped (<i>Poecile atricapillus</i>) and mountain chickadee (<i>Poecile gambeli</i>) contact call contains species, sex, and individual identity features

2010· article· en· W1975988972 on OpenAlexaff
Lauren M. Guillette, Laurie L. Bloomfield, Emily R. Batty, Michael R. W. Dawson, Christopher B. Sturdy

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsAlgoma UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllopatric speciationSympatric speciationAgonistic behaviourIdentity (music)CommunicationBiologyZoologySocial psychologyPsychologyAcousticsDemographySociologyAggressionPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tseet contact call, common to both black-capped and mountain chickadees, is among the most frequently produced call of each species, but has remained little studied until now. In the current study, the authors characterized the tseet call of adult allopatric and sympatric black-capped and mountain chickadees in terms of nine acoustic features in a fashion similar to descriptive accounts of both species' chick-a-dee calls. Summary statistics, the potential for individual coding, and classification by linear discriminant analysis were used to describe the tseet call. The authors were able to correctly classify tseet calls in terms of which group or individual produced it with high accuracy. Furthermore, several acoustic features are highly individualized, indicating that the chickadees may use these features to identify signalers as individuals or members of a particular group.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.487

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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