Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent research has demonstrated that dispersal distance and the square root of home-range size covary proportionately across mammal species. I tested whether these findings could be generalized to another taxon. Breeding territories of some bird species are analogous to mammalian home ranges, so I tested whether dispersal distance and territory size in these birds covaried and were proportional. Variables were log 10 -transformed before analysis. When considered independently of body mass, median natal dispersal distance and breeding territory size were positively related (F [1,29] = 8.91, R 2 = 0.23, P = 0.005). Median dispersal distance was proportionally related to the square root of territory size by a multiple of 12. This relationship was especially strong for non-migrants (F [1,15] = 49.84, R 2 = 0.77, P = 3.87 × 10 6 ). Maximum natal dispersal distance and breeding territory size also covaried when body size effects were removed, but this relationship was only significant when migrants were removed from the sample (F [1,24] = 5.66, R 2 = 0.19, P = 0.025). Maximum dispersal distance did not have a proportional relationship with territory size. This could result from sampling error or from real processes (e.g., relatively shorter dispersals by birds with large territories). The proportional relationship between median dispersal distance and territory size can be used as a cross-species scaling rule.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".