MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949807582 · doi:10.1101/664896

An analysis of avian vocal performance at the note and song levels

2019· preprint· en· W2949807582 on OpenAlexafffund
David M. Logue, Jacob A. Sheppard, Bailey Walton, Benjamin Brinkman, Orlando J. Medina

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPopulationSexual selectionBiologyEcologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sexual displays that require extreme feats of physiological performance have the potential to reliably indicate the signaller’s skill. The hypothesis that the structure of bird song is physiologically constrained remains controversial. We tested for evidence of performance constraints in Adelaide’s warblers ( Setophaga adelaidae ) songs. At the note level, we identified three trade-offs with well-defined limits. At the song level, we identified two trade-offs, but their limits were less well-defined than the note-level limits. Trade-offs at both levels suggest that song structure is constrained by limits to the speed of both frequency modulation (while vocalizing and between notes) and respiration. Individual males experience the same trade-offs that characterize the population, but the intensity of those trade-offs varies among individuals. Performance metrics derived from the observed limits to performance varied moderately among individuals and strongly among song types. Note-level performance metrics were positively skewed, as predicted by the hypothesis that this population has experienced positive selection for constrained performance. We conclude that physiological limits on frequency modulation and respiration constrain song structure in male Adelaide’s warblers. Further work is needed to determine whether receivers respond to natural levels of variation in performance, and whether performance correlates with singer quality.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.579
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207