MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051798367 · doi:10.1121/1.4709204

Behavioral in-air audiogram of two Arctic fox (<i>Alopex lagopus</i>) at the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium

2012· article· en· W2051798367 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amanda L. Stansbury, Jeànette A. Thomas, Colleen E. Stalf, Lisa D. Murphy, Dusty Lombardi, Jeremy Carpenter, Troy Mueller

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLagopusAudiogramVulpesAudiometerRange (aeronautics)Ursus maritimusZoologyBiologyMicrotusArcticAudiologyPredationEcologyHearing lossAudiometryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aerial audiograms of two captive adult, male Arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) were measured using a two-alternative, forced-choice paradigm and descending staircase method of signal presentation at the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium. Both fox displayed a typical mammalian U-shaped audiometric curve, with a functional hearing range of 125 Hz to 16 kHz (sensitivity < 60 dB re: 20 μPa) and average peak sensitivity of 22 dB re: 20 μPa at 4 kHz. This range is similar to airborne hearing thresholds previously measured for two closely related species, the kit fox (Vulpes marotis) and the domestic dog (Canis familiaris). There was little variability around threshold and no significant difference between the hearing curves of the two fox. The peak sensitivities of the Arctic fox overlaps their vocal range, the vocal range of their prey; field voles (Microtus agrestis), collared lemmings (Dicrostonyx groenlandicus), Canada geese (Branta canadensis), and the hearing range of a predator; the polar bear (Ursus maritimus). Ambient noise levels were monitored and test frequencies below 5 kHz were possibly masked. Potential response bias was examined using Receiver Operator Characteristic analysis and had a conservative bias. Masking effects and conservative response bias may have resulted in slightly underestimated hearing curves.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207