MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103078479 · doi:10.1093/beheco/aru138

Individual attributes and self-organizational processes affect dominance network structure in pukeko

2014· article· en· W2103078479 on OpenAlexaff
Cody J. Dey, James S. Quinn

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Ecology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomophilyDominance (genetics)BiologyOrderlinessDominance hierarchyExponential random graph modelsTransitive relationEcologySocial psychologyAggressionPsychologyRandom graphMathematicsGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dominance relationships are an important type of social relationship that can influence group dynamics and individual fitness. However, most studies on dominance have been restricted to investigating the orderliness of dominance hierarchies and how individual traits influence dominance rank. Here, we used a social network approach to investigate the patterns and quality of dominance interactions in the pukeko, a cooperatively breeding bird that lives in stable, mixed-sex social groups. By using a combination of modern statistical techniques, including one of the first applications of exponential random graph models in behavioral ecology, we show that pukeko dominance networks emerge from both the attributes of individuals, as well as from endogenous, self-organization of dominance relationships (i.e., structural dependence). Pukeko dominance networks were influenced by sexual differences in dominance interactions, sexual homophily, characteristics of status signals, and a tendency to form transitive triad motifs. These factors have differential effects on submissive and aggressive behaviors but ultimately lead to the formation of orderly and highly asymmetrical dominance hierarchies that are temporally stable. This study demonstrates the utility of multivariate statistical tools for network analysis of animal societies and provides a rich understanding of the factors that influence dominance interactions in this interesting species.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations45
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral EcologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207