Quantitative descriptions of resource choice in ecological models
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 This article reviews the subject of resource choice by consumers. It is concerned with how such choice has been and should be represented in quantitative ecological models. This requires consideration of the dynamics of behavioral change and the fitness consequences of different resource intake rates. The topic is important because of the impact of choice on the functional response of the consumer to each of the resources it consumes. A variety of open questions related to choice are addressed. These include: the relationship between optimal diet choice and switching; the relationship between adaptive choice of two or resources and type‐3 functional responses to a single resource; whether switching behavior requires choice and whether choice always results in switching behavior; why partial preferences are observed; whether choice between habitats is fundamentally different from choice within habitats; how between‐individual variation in parameters related to resource use alters functional responses measured at the population level. The impacts of choice on stability are discussed briefly. The costs of increased resource use and the type of nutritional interactions between resources are particularly important determinants of adaptive resource choice, and are considered in some detail.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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