Improved performance, within-individual consistency and between-individual differences in the righting behaviour of the Caribbean sea star, Oreaster reticulatus
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals cope differently to challenging and stressful situations. Being inverted is challenging and stressful for animals, as the position leaves them vulnerable to predators and desiccation. Although sea star self-righting was first studied in the 19th century, efforts to quantify patterns of within-individual consistency and among-individual differences are limited. Here we examined the performance and repeatability of righting behaviour in the Caribbean sea star ( Oreaster reticulatus ). Oreaster reticulatus were wild caught and transported to a nearby facility where they were inverted up to five times. Most animals improved their righting times and exhibited within-individual consistency and among individual differences in righting method. We posit that it may be favourable to employ a consistent righting method to effectively achieve an upright position. Predation pressure and stress physiology are hypothesized to shape individual differences in righting behaviour. Moreover, these results provide preliminary evidence of personality in sea stars.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it