MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028437830 · doi:10.1121/1.3068453

Asymmetries in the individual distinctiveness and maternal recognition of infant contact calls and distress screams in baboons

2009· article· en· W2028437830 on OpenAlexaff
Drew Rendall, Hugh Notman, Michael J. Owren

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsAthabasca UniversityUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsOptimal distinctiveness theoryPsychologyDistressDevelopmental psychologyIdentity (music)CommunicationVocal communicationSocial psychologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key component of nonhuman primate vocal communication is the production and recognition of clear cues to social identity that function in the management of these species' individualistic social relationships. However, it remains unclear how ubiquitous such identity cues are across call types and age-sex classes and what the underlying vocal production mechanisms responsible might be. This study focused on two structurally distinct call types produced by infant baboons in contexts that place a similar functional premium on communicating clear cues to caller identity: (1) contact calls produced when physically separated from, and attempting to relocate, mothers and (2) distress screams produced when aggressively attacked by other group members. Acoustic analyses and field experiments were conducted to examine individual differentiation in single vocalizations of each type and to test mothers' ability to recognize infant calls. Both call types showed statistically significant individual differentiation, but the magnitude of the differentiation was substantially higher in contact calls. Mothers readily discriminated own-offspring contact calls from those of familiar but unrelated infants, but did not do so when it came to distress screams. Several possible explanations for these asymmetries in call differentiation and recognition are considered.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations77
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207