Geographic song variation and dawn singing behavior of the cerulean warbler (Setophaga cerulea)
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
This study presents the results of research into the vocal behavior of the Cerulean \nWarbler, a small, migratory songbird with learned songs that breeds in the eastern U.S. and \nsouthern Canada and winters in northern South America. Specifically, I 1) assessed patterns of \ngeographic variation in the species’ songs, as well as 2) characterized the unique period of \nsinging that occurs prior to sunrise, known as “dawn song.” I found that Cerulean Warbler song \nstructure within the species’ core breeding range, where I had high power to discriminate \ndifferences, was highly uniform in all of the acoustic variables measured. Songs were \nremarkably constrained in their acoustic features: all songs were composed of 2-4 sections and \nhad similar durations and frequency bandwidths. I failed to find geographically structured \nsinging, or “dialects.” The dawn singing behavior of paired male Cerulean Warblers was best \nexplained by seasonality (Julian date), although the breeding stage of the pair’s nest, as well as \nweather (rain, wind, and temperature) also influenced certain aspects of dawn song. Early in the \nbreeding season, males sang at high rates, for long durations, and their dawn song bouts ended \nafter sunrise. By mid-season, many males stopped singing dawn song, but those that continued \nsung at slower rates, for shorter durations, and their dawn bouts ended well before sunrise.
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) | 0.000 | 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