MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2736685875 · doi:10.1142/s0218127417500997

A Predator–Prey Model with Prey Population Guided Anti-Predator Behavior

2017· article· en· W2736685875 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsLimit cyclePredatorPopulationBifurcationHopf bifurcationMathematicsPredationBistabilityBiological applications of bifurcation theoryControl theory (sociology)Homoclinic orbitSaddle-node bifurcationBogdanov–Takens bifurcationLimit (mathematics)Statistical physicsNonlinear systemEcologyBiologyMathematical analysisPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a predator–prey system with prey population guided anti-predator behavior, in which anti-predator behaviors happen only when the population size of the prey is greater than a threshold. We investigate the rich dynamics of the proposed piecewise model as well as both subsystems without and with nonlinear functional response. In particular, the subsystem with anti-predator behaviors exhibits rich dynamical behaviors including saddle-node bifurcation, Hopf bifurcation, Bogdanov–Takens bifurcation and homoclinic bifurcation. Further, besides the dynamical properties of subsystems the piecewise system shows some new complicated dynamical behaviors as the threshold value varies, including unstable limit cycle, semistable limit cycle, bistability of equilibrium and limit cycle, and tristability of three equilibria. From the switching system we can conclude that a great anti-predator rate induces the prey population to persist more likely, but whether the prey and predator populations coexist depends further on the threshold that triggers anti-predator behavior. Especially, a large threshold not only makes coexistence of the prey and predator populations as an equilibrium more likely, but also damps the predator–prey oscillations.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.310 · 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