Dominance hierarchies and status recognition in the crayfish<i>Procambarus acutus acutus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the eastern white river crayfish, Procambarus acutus acutus, the processes that act during hierarchy formation were explored by analyzing the behavior of 23 symmetric pairs of form I males. The experimental design comprised three subsequent phases: isolation, familiarization, and experimental phases. In the latter, pairs were formed of (i) unfamiliar opponents having different status, (ii, iii) unfamiliar opponents having the same status, either two alphas or two betas, and (iv) familiar opponents. The first result was that P. a. acutus is capable of establishing stable dominance hierarchies. Secondly, behavioral differences between the winners and the losers, a fast assessment of status, and self-reinforcing effects of recent experience were demonstrated. Thirdly, P. a. acutus was found to recognize the status of its rival but not its individual identity. In fact, even if paired with unfamiliar opponents, previous winners and losers behaved as in the preceding days. Conversely, both frequency and intensity of fighting increased when individuals of the same rank were opposed. These phenomena might be a consequence of "winning and losing effects". However, the increased readiness of former betas to attack contradicts the loser effect and validates the hypothesis of status recognition.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".