Conventional displays: Evidence for socially mediated costs of threat displays in a lizard
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
Abstract Threat displays are used to settle the vast majority of contests between green anoles ( Anolis carolinensis ). While these displays have been the subject of a number of studies, very little is understood about the information they convey. Theoretical models divide displays into several types of signals, based on the mechanism that stabilizes their use: 1) performance signals, 2) handicapping signals, or 3) conventional displays. The existence of performance displays has excellent empirical support, as do models of their use. Handicapped signalling models, especially those relating to mate‐choice, have been highly influential, though little evidence suggests that threat displays are, in fact, handicapping. Most threat displays appear to be conventional, but little empirical work documents conventional signalling systems. This study investigated the use of headbob, pushup, and lateral compression displays, and concluded that headbob cadence, a discrete signal with three alternative rhythms, is a conventional display indicating impending escalation. Pushups and lateral compression displays appear not to be handicaps, since neither indicates impending escalation, and they do not correlate with fighting ability or condition. Aggr. Behav. 30:326–341, 2004. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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