MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164757591 · doi:10.1163/156853904772746628

Chickadee Song Structure is Individually Distinctive Over Long Broadcast Distances

2004· article· en· W2164757591 on OpenAlexafffund
Peter J. Christie, Daniel J. Mennill, Laurene M. Ratcliffe

Bibliographic record

VenueBehaviour · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSociety of Canadian Ornithologists
KeywordsChorusSingingCommunicationPsychologyAcousticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The two-note fee-bee song of male black-capped chickadees functions during the dawn chorus, in part, as a sexual signal across large distances. How song structure might encode information about male quality, however, remains unclear. We studied the availability of cues to male social rank (a proxy indicator of male quality), within the acoustic structure of dawn chorus songs of male chickadees whose flock dominance status we determined the previous winter. We used analysis of variance and discriminant function analysis to demonstrate that five temporal, frequency or relative amplitude features of song can predict individual identity but not the category of social rank (dominant versus subordinate) to which individuals belong. After transmitting chickadee songs through the forest and re-recording them at four broadcast distances, we found that song structure continued to effectively predict singer identity by our statistical methods despite significant acoustic degradation for as long as songs remained audible (up to 80 m). In particular, the relative frequency interval between the two notes is both the most invariant between-male measure and among the most individually distinctive. We conclude the structure of dawn chorus songs could function across large distances to signal the identity of familiar singing males whose relative quality is known to the listener from other interactions (such as encounters within winter flocks).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations61
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehaviourSame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207