Panorama similarity and navigational knowledge in the nocturnal bull ant, <i>Myrmicia midas</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nocturnal ants forage and navigate during periods of reduced light, making detection of visual cues difficult, yet they are skilled visual navigators. These foragers retain visual panoramic memories both around the nest and along known routes for later use, be it to return to previously visited food sites or to the nest. Here, we explore the navigational knowledge of the nocturnal bull ant, Myrmecia midas, by investigating differences in nest-ward homing after displacement of three forager groups based on similarities in the panoramas between the release site and previously visited locations. Foragers that travel straight up the foraging tree or to close trees around the nest show reduced navigational success in orienting and returning from displacements compared to individuals that forage further from the nest site. By analysing the cues present in the panorama, we show that multiple metrics of forager navigational performance correspond with the degree of similarity between the release site panorama and panoramas of previously visited sites. In highly cluttered environments, where panoramas change rapidly over short distances, the views acquired near the nest are only useful over a small area and memories acquired along foraging routes become critical.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".