Incorporating uncertainty into the study of animal social networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past decade network theory has been applied successfully to the study of a variety of complex adaptive systems. However, the application of these techniques to non-human social networks has several shortfalls. Firstly, in most cases the strength of associations between individuals is disregarded. Secondly, present techniques assume that observed interactions are invariant values and not statistical samples taken from a population. These two simplifications have weakened the value of these techniques when applied to the study of animal social systems. Here we introduce a set of behaviorally meaningful weighted network statistics that can be readily applied to matrices of association indices between pairs of individual animals. We also introduce bootstrapping techniques that estimate the effects of sampling uncertainty on the network statistics and structure. Finally, we discuss the use of randomisation tests to detect the departure of observed network statistics from expected values under null hypotheses of random association given the sampling structure of the data. We use two case studies to show that these techniques provide invaluable insight in the dynamics of interactions within social units and in the community structure of societies.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".