VOCALIZATIONS OF THE TUAMOTU SANDPIPER, PROSOBONIA CANCELLATA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The biology of the endangered Tuamotu Sandpiper (Prosobonia cancellata) is essentially unknown. We analyzed vocalizations from presumed adult individuals and pairs, and family groups, recorded in French Polynesia during March 1990 and 2003. We recognized three types of vocalizations. Presumed adults uttered types I and II. These were brief (about 30–40 and 20–120 ms, respectively) and simple in structure (increasing then decreasing in frequency) but harmonically rich, with most energy in the second or third harmonics (peak fundamental frequency was about 775–1,380 Hz), as in some other Scolopacidae. Higher harmonics reached unusually high frequencies for a scolopacid (approaching 14 kHz). Call types I and II were uttered singly or as couplets, triplets, or longer sequences. Type III calls were longer (about 115–470 ms), of narrower bandwidth, and with modulations of a carrier frequency that decreased from about 1,925 to 1,305 Hz; they were given by a presumed family group and may represent calls of dependent young birds. Harmonic richness and variation in frequency and temporal variables within call types are consistent with a short range communication system.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".