MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2233865695 · doi:10.1098/rsif.2015.0647

Navigating the flow: individual and continuum models for homing in flowing environments

2015· article· en· W2233865695 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin J. Painter, Thomas Hillen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Royal Society Interface · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurtle Biology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarine engineeringHoming (biology)Computer scienceWatercraftPopulationScalingFlow (mathematics)Environmental scienceFlocking (texture)StormEcologyMeteorologyMechanicsGeographyPhysicsEngineeringMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Navigation for aquatic and airborne species often takes place in the face of complicated flows, from persistent currents to highly unpredictable storms. Hydrodynamic models are capable of simulating flow dynamics and provide the impetus for much individual-based modelling, in which particle-sized individuals are immersed into a flowing medium. These models yield insights on the impact of currents on population distributions from fish eggs to large organisms, yet their computational demands and intractability reduce their capacity to generate the broader, less parameter-specific, insights allowed by traditional continuous approaches. In this paper, we formulate an individual-based model for navigation within a flowing field and apply scaling to derive its corresponding macroscopic and continuous model. We apply it to various movement classes, from drifters that simply go with the flow to navigators that respond to environmental orienteering cues. The utility of the model is demonstrated via its application to 'homing' problems and, in particular, the navigation of the marine green turtle Chelonia mydas to Ascension Island.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations45
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Royal Society InterfaceSame topicTurtle Biology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207