Analysis of foraging movements of Atlantic bluefin tuna ( <i>Thunnus thynnus</i> ): individuals switch between two modes of search behaviour
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
Abstract We investigate the application of quantitative techniques for distinguishing adaptive search behaviour in Atlantic bluefin tuna ( Thunnus thynnus ). The analysis demonstrates the application of a novel spectral analysis technique for resolving and measuring periodicity in animal behaviour patterns. Two different search strategies are identified that include regulation of turning ( klinokinesis ) and speed ( orthokinesis ). Our results provide evidence that bluefin tuna attempt to optimize their searching efficiency through adjustments in the duration and timing of switching between these two searching strategies. Repetitive, diurnal deep dives were also found to coincide with switching of search behaviour. Additional tracking experiments with larger sample sizes are needed to better identify how individuals switch between the two search strategies and how such decisions may collectively improve the searching and foraging efficiency of their schools ( synchrokinesis , social taxis ) in response to changes in the size or composition of prey aggregations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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