Gestural communication in subadult bonobos (Pan paniscus): Repertoire and use
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
This article aims to provide an inventory of the communicative gestures used by bonobos (Pan paniscus), based on observations of subadult bonobos and descriptions of gestural signals and similar behaviors in wild and captive bonobo groups. In addition, we focus on the underlying processes of social cognition, including learning mechanisms and flexibility of gesture use (such as adjustment to the attentional state of the recipient). The subjects were seven bonobos, aged 1-8 years, living in two different groups in captivity. Twenty distinct gestures (one auditory, eight tactile, and 11 visual) were recorded. We found individual differences and similar degrees of concordance of the gestural repertoires between and within groups, which provide evidence that ontogenetic ritualization is the main learning process involved. There is suggestive evidence, however, that some form of social learning may be responsible for the acquisition of special gestures. Overall, the present study establishes that the gestural repertoire of bonobos can be characterized as flexible and adapted to various communicative circumstances, including the attentional state of the recipient. Differences from and similarities to the other African ape species 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.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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