Role of social interactions in dynamic patterns of resource patches and forager aggregation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dynamics of resource patches and species that exploit such patches are of interest to ecologists, conservation biologists, modelers, and mathematicians. Here we consider how social interactions can create unique, evolving patterns in space and time. Whereas simple prey taxis (with consumable prey) promotes spatial uniform distributions, here we show that taxis in producer-scrounger groups can lead to pattern formation. We consider two types of foragers: those that search directly ("producers") and those that exploit other foragers to find food ("scroungers" or exploiters). We show that such groups can sustain fluctuating spatiotemporal patterns, akin to "waves of pursuit." Investigating the relative benefits to the individuals, we observed conditions under which either strategy leads to enhanced success, defined as net food consumption. Foragers that search for food directly have an advantage when food patches are localized. Those that seek aggregations of group mates do better when their ability to track group mates exceeds the foragers' food-sensing acuity. When behavioral switching or reproductive success of the strategies is included, the relative abundance of foragers and exploiters is dynamic over time, in contrast with classic models that predict stable frequencies. Our work shows the importance of considering two-way interaction--i.e., how food distribution both influences and is influenced by social foraging and aggregation of predators.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".