MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117858726 · doi:10.1080/1023624042000199908

Individual discrimination in the big-clawed snapping shrimp,<i>Alpheus heterochelis</i>

2004· article· en· W2117858726 on OpenAlexafffund
Jessica L. Ward, Nehal Saleh, David Dunham, Nasreen Rahman

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine and Freshwater Behaviour and Physiology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsShrimpBiologyZoologyStimulus (psychology)Escape responseEcologyCognitive psychologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rahman et al. (Rahman, N., Dunham, D.W. and Govind, C.K. (). Mate recognition and pairing in the big-clawed snapping shrimp, Alpheus herterochelis. Mar. Fresh. Behav. Physiol., 34, 213–226.) demonstrated discrimination by snapping shrimp between former mates and unfamiliar conspecifics, but did not test individual discrimination. In the present study, snapping shrimp showed discrimination between familiar and unfamiliar same-sex conspecifics by preferentially entering that arm of a Y-maze leading to familiar individuals. Furthermore, after being exposed to water from the home tanks of unknown individuals, they later showed an elevated response to this water, if the direction from which the water came into their tank was changed to be novel. This indicates that test subjects associated a familiar chemical stimulus with its location in the environment. This discrimination could only have been made if that chemical signature were recognised as different from that of another chemically familiar individual. This result also demonstrates that the water surrounding an individual contains sufficient (chemical) information to allow discrimination of one individual from another.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine and Freshwater Behaviour and PhysiologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207