Physical constraints of cultural evolution of dialects in killer whales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Odontocete sounds are produced by two pairs of phonic lips situated in soft nares below the blowhole; the right pair is larger and is more likely to produce clicks, while the left pair is more likely to produce whistles. This has important implications for the cultural evolution of delphinid sounds: the greater the physical constraints, the greater the probability of random convergence. In this paper the authors examine the call structure of eight killer whale populations to identify structural constraints and to determine if they are consistent among all populations. Constraints were especially pronounced in two-voiced calls. In the calls of all eight populations, the lower component of two-voiced (biphonic) calls was typically centered below 4 kHz, while the upper component was typically above that value. The lower component of two-voiced calls had a narrower frequency range than single-voiced calls in all populations. This may be because some single-voiced calls are homologous to the lower component, while others are homologous to the higher component of two-voiced calls. Physical constraints on the call structure reduce the possible variation and increase the probability of random convergence, producing similar calls in different populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".