MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042484018 · doi:10.1242/jeb.01331

Stroke patterns and regulation of swim speed and energy cost in free-ranging Brunnich's guillemots

2004· article· en· W2042484018 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

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDescent (aeronautics)BuoyancyFuselageDragThrustNeutral buoyancyWork (physics)Stroke (engine)GeologyMechanicsAnatomyGeodesyPhysicsMeteorologyMedicineAerospace engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Loggers were attached to free-ranging Brünnich's guillemots Uria lomvia during dives, to measure swim speeds, body angles, stroke rates, stroke and glide durations, and acceleration patterns within strokes, and the data were used to model the mechanical costs of propelling the body fuselage (head and trunk excluding wings). During vertical dives to 102-135 m, guillemots regulated their speed during descent and much of ascent to about 1.6+/-0.2 m s(-1). Stroke rate declined very gradually with depth, with little or no gliding between strokes. Entire strokes from 2 m to 20 m depth had similar forward thrust on upstroke vs downstroke, whereas at deeper depths and during horizontal swimming there was much greater thrust on the downstroke. Despite this distinct transition, these differences had small effect (<6%) on our estimates of mechanical cost to propel the body fuselage, which did not include drag of the wings. Work stroke(-1) was quite high as speed increased dramatically in the first 5 m of descent against high buoyancy. Thereafter, speed and associated drag increased gradually as buoyancy slowly declined, so that mechanical work stroke(-1) during the rest of descent stayed relatively constant. Similar work stroke(-1) was maintained during non-pursuit swimming at the bottom, and during powered ascent to the depth of neutral buoyancy (about 71 m). Even with adjustments in respiratory air volume of +/-60%, modeled work against buoyancy was important mainly in the top 15 m of descent, after which almost all work was against drag. Drag was in fact underestimated, as our values did not include enhancement of drag by altered flow around active swimmers. With increasing buoyancy during ascent above 71 m, stroke rate, glide periods, stroke acceleration patterns, body angle and work stroke(-1) were far more variable than during descent; however, mean speed remained fairly constant until buoyancy increased rapidly near the surface. For dives to depths >20 m, drag is by far the main component of mechanical work for these diving birds, and speed may be regulated to keep work against drag within a relatively narrow range.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.225 · 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