MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Discrimination of conspecific‐built chimneys from human‐built ones by the burrowing crayfish, <i>Fallicambarus fodiens</i> (Decapoda, Cambaridae)

2001· article· en· W2041028413 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInvertebrate Biology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrayfishChimney (locomotive)BiologyDecapodaJuvenileEcologyCrustaceanOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The vast majority of tested juvenile crayfish of Fallicambarus fodiens consistently preferred conspecific‐built mud chimneys over similar‐looking human‐built chimneys. When the chimneys were surrounded by transparent acetate sheets, the crayfish no longer discriminated between conspecific‐built and human‐built chimneys. This suggests that visual cues were not important in allowing the crayfish to discriminate between the two chimney types. In the absence of chimneys, significantly more crayfish showed an initial preference for mud saturated with water that had contained conspecifics, over similar mud saturated with distilled water. This indicates that chemical cues play a role in allowing these crayfish to discriminate between the conspecific‐conditioned mud and the control wet mud. The preference of F. fodiens individuals for conspecific‐built chimneys appears to be based, at least in part, on chemical cues, possibly in addition to tactile cues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.232 · 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