The Judder of the Cricket: The Variance Underlying the Invariance in Behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the behavior of many animals can be identified as involving discrete and stereotyped actions, there is a persistent tension between emphasizing the fixedness of the actions (“Fixed Action Patterns”) and emphasizing the variation in the components comprising those actions (“Modal ActionPatterns”). One such action, the back and forward judder of crickets often exhibited in agonistic interactions, was analyzed. Judders occurring on a horizontal surface by Gryllus bimaculatus were compared to those occurring on an inclined platform. Although the body movements involved were variable, that variability occurred in the context of maintaining some features of judder invariant. For example, the crickets maintained their bodies so that they were horizontal relative to the substrate, not to gravity, and most features of the back and forward movement (e.g., distance moved, velocity) were maintained as fixed despite differences in posture and movement. At a theoretical level, what these findings suggest is that behavior patterns involve a combination of fixedness and variation in the service of that fixedness. It becomes an empirical issue to discern these complementary components.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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 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".