Sex-differences in timing of the black-capped chickadee fee-bee song
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Male black-capped chickadees produce fee-bee songs in spring for mate attraction and territorial defense. Less is known about the female song use in this species although a version of song, soft-song, appears to be used in mate-mate communication. Recent analyses of songs produced by chickadees revealed that female fee-bee songs are distinct from male songs in the spectral domain. Chickadees also precisely control the timing of their fee-bee songs during territory defense. No previous work has explored whether there are sex differences in the temporal patterning of fee-bee song production. Inter-song intervals were extracted from recordings of fee-bee songs produced in non-social contexts by 8 male and 7 female birds. Male chickadees produced fee-bee songs regularly, with the majority of songs spaced at intervals of 2.5–5.0 s. Song timing by females was more variable with production intervals ranging from 1.5 to 8.0 s. The relative stereotypy of song timing by males is consistent with earlier work suggesting that males may modulate song timing to communicate with other birds (e.g., by timing song production to either reduce or increase the likelihood that their songs overlap with those of other singers), and with differential use of songs by males and females.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".