Factors affecting the site of investment, and the reliance on savings for arctic breeders : the capital–income dichotomy revisited
Bibliographic record
Abstract
\n\t\t\t\t\tThe extent to which migratory birds that breed in the Arctic and winter in southern biomes rely on residual body stores for reproduction is unresolved. The short arctic summer and the limited availability of food early in the season constrain the time available for successful reproduction. Birds that are able to bring sufficient endogenous reserves to the breeding ground to meet, at least partially, the demands of egg-laying can initiate clutch production soon after arrival, thereby shortening the length of the breeding season and improving the chances of reproductive success. The amount of reserves available will be influenced by body size, the increased energetic and predation costs associated with carrying large stores, distances between staging sites and the location of the breeding grounds within the Arctic. Birds need not fly directly to the breeding grounds from the established temperate staging sites. Extensive feeding by migrants may occur in the Arctic, even within a few kilometres of the breeding sites as the birds track the retreating snowline. Irrespective of their size, birds are thus able to store some resources necessary for egg laying at local or regional scales. It is thus important to make a distinction between local capital and distant capital breeding. The extent to which a bird is characterized as a distant capital, local capital, or an income breeder not only varies between species, but also between individuals and seasons.<br />\n\t\t\t\t
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".