MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137504185 · doi:10.1159/000116516

The Hippocampal Complex of Food-Storing Birds

2008· article· en· W2137504185 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Behavior and Evolution · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHippocampal formationCerebrumBiologyHippocampusZoologyNeuroscienceEcologyCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three families of North American passerines--chickadees, nuthatches and jays--store food. Previous research has shown that memory for the spatial locations of caches is the principal mechanism of cache recovery. It has also been previously shown that the hippocampal complex (hippocampus and area parahippocampalis) plays an important role in memory for cache sites. The present study determined the volume of the hippocampal complex and the telencephalon in 3 food-storing families and in 10 non-food-storing families and subfamilies of passerines. The hippocampal complex is larger in food-storing birds than in non-food-storing birds. This difference is greater than expected from allometric relations among the hippocampal complex, telencephalon and body weight. Food-storing families are not more closely related to each other than they are to non-food-storing families and subfamilies, and the greater size of the hippocampal complex in food-storing birds is therefore the result of evolutionary convergence. Natural selection has led to a larger hippocampal complex in birds that rely on memory to recover spatially dispersed food caches.

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 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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.256 · 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