The function of play bows in Canis lupus and its variants: a comparison of dingo (Canis lupus dingo), dog (Canis lupus familiaris) and wolf puppies (Canis lupus)
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
Abstract Play bows represent a common, highly stereotyped behaviour across the genus Canis . However, much of what we know is limited to the wolf and its domestic derivative, the domestic dog. Here we continue to look at the function of play bows among subspecies/variants of Canis lupus by including the dingo. Comparing dingoes to wolves and dogs may provide further insight into the impact of domestication on play behaviour. We analysed play bows in three-to-six month old dingo puppies and compared the results to previous studies of wolves and dogs. The function of play bows in dingoes appears consistent with those observed in dogs and wolf puppies. However, subtle intraspecific differences (such as the frequency and duration of play bows, and vocalizations during play) were apparent, and warrant further investigation in the genus Canis , as well as the Family Canidae more broadly.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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