Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article verifies that the ideal free distribution (IFD) is evolutionarily stable, provided the payoff in each patch decreases with an increasing number of individuals. General frequency-dependent models of migratory dynamics that differ in the degree of animal omniscience are then developed. These models do not exclude migration at the IFD where balanced dispersal emerges. It is shown that the population distribution converges to the IFD even when animals are nonideal (i.e., they do not know the quality of all patches). In particular, the IFD emerges when animals never migrate from patches with a higher payoff to patches with a lower payoff and when some animals always migrate to the best patch. It is shown that some random migration does not necessarily lead to undermatching, provided migration occurs at the IFD. The effect of population dynamics on the IFD (and vice versa) is analyzed. Without any migration, it is shown that population dynamics alone drive the population distribution to the IFD. If animal migration tends (for each fixed population size) to the IFD, then the combined migration-population dynamics evolve to the population IFD independent of the two timescales (i.e., behavioral vs. population).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".