The responses of prey fish to temporal variation in predation risk: sensory habituation or risk assessment?
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
Predation is an important selection pressure acting on prey behavior. Although numerous studies have shown that when predation risk is high, prey tend to increase vigilance and reduce foraging effort, until recently, few studies have looked at how temporal patterns of risk influence the trade-off between foraging and antipredator behavior. The risk allocation hypothesis predicts that prey should respond strongly to predators that are usually absent, as they can meet their energy demands during safe periods. In contrast, if predators are almost always present, prey need to forage actively even though predators are present, a counter-intuitive prediction for many behavioral ecologists. This decrease in antipredator behavior on increasing exposure to risk has thus far been attributed to sensory habituation. Using cichlids, we show that sensory habituation is likely not the proximate explanation for the reduction in antipredator behaviors in this system. Such responses may rather be the result of adaptive decision making.
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 | 0.001 | 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