Acoustic analyses of two undocumented sound patterns in the <i>Drosophila suzukii</i> and <i>D. takahashii</i> species subgroups.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acoustic analyses of the courtship songs of the suzukii and takahashii subgroups in the Drosophila melanogaster species group were conducted. The primary and secondary pulse phases that are common in the melanogaster subgroup were not observed in these two subgroups. However, two undocumented sound patterns were discovered. D. biarmipes and D. pulchrella (suzukii subgroup) produce high amplitude, nonrhythmic “toot” sounds, which range from 82–158 ms in duration. The toot sound in D. biarmipes has a consistent dynamic frequency profile. It starts with an onset of 479 Hz and gradually falls to 422 Hz and then rises to 477 Hz. The toot sound in D. pulchrella has a significantly lower frequency when compared to D. biarmipes. Its frequency profile falls gradually from 352–259 Hz. In addition, a “turbo” sound was recorded in D. prostipennis (takahashii subgroup). It is composed of short, high frequency pulses (520 Hz) with 4 ms interpulse intervals. In the melanogaster subgroup, the parameters of pulses have been proposed to play an important role in female preference. The results of the present study suggest that there might be other parameters at play in the species investigated in the current study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it