Artificial neural network discrimination of black-capped chickadee (<i>Poecile atricapillus</i>) call notes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artificial neural networks were trained to discriminate between two different notes from the "chick-a-dee" call of the black-capped chickadee (Poecile atricapillus). An individual note was represented as a vector of nine summary features taken from note spectrograms. A network was trained to respond to exemplar notes of one type (e.g., A notes) and to fail to respond to exemplar notes of another type (e.g., B notes). After this training, the network was presented novel notes of the two different types, as well as notes of the same two types that had been shifted upwards or downwards in frequency. The strength of the response of the network to each novel and shifted note was recorded. When network responses were plotted as a function of the degree of frequency shift, the results were very similar to those observed in birds that were trained in an analogous task [Charrier et al., J. Comp. Psychol. 119(4), 371-380 (2005)]. The implications of these results to simulating behavioral studies of animal communication are discussed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".