MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Biphonation May Function to Enhance Individual Recognition in the Dhole, <i>Cuon alpinus</i>

2006· article· en· W2048909824 on OpenAlexaff
Elena V. Volodina, Ilya A. Volodin, Irina V. Isaeva, Carolyn Unck

Bibliographic record

VenueEthology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscriminant function analysisFunction (biology)Linear discriminant analysisFeature (linguistics)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceBiologyMachine learningEvolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Biphonation (two independent fundamental frequencies in a call spectrum) represents one of the most widespread nonlinear phenomena in mammalian vocalizations. Recently, the structure of biphonations was described in detail; however, their functions are poorly understood. For the dhole (Cuon alpinus), biphonic calls represent a prominent feature of vocal activity. In this species, the biphonic call is composed of two frequency components – the high‐frequency squeak and the low‐frequency yap, which also occur alone as separate calls. In this study, we test the hypothesis that the complication of call structure, resulting from the joining of these calls into the biphonic yap–squeak may enhance the potential for individual recognition in the dhole. We randomly selected for analysis 30 high‐frequency squeaks, 30 low‐frequency yaps and 30 biphonic yap–squeaks per animal from five subadult captive dholes (450 calls in total). Discriminant analysis, based on 10 squeak parameter values, showed 80.7% correct assignment to a predicted individual. For 10 yap parameters, the correct assignment was only 44.7%. However, the analysis based on 10 parameters of the biphonic yap–squeak, selected as best contributing to discrimination, showed 96.7% correct assignment to a predicted individual. The results provide strong support for the hypothesis tested showing that the joining of two independent calls into a common vocalization may function to enhance individual recognition in the dhole.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations92
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthologySame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207