MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955382901 · doi:10.1111/ele.13327

Leveraging multidimensional heterogeneity in resource selection to define movement tactics of animals

2019· letter· en· W2955382901 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Guillaume Bastille‐Rousseau, George Wittemyer

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Letters · 2019
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaRussian Science FoundationNature Conservancy
KeywordsSelection (genetic algorithm)Resource (disambiguation)EcologyMovement (music)BiologyEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing interest in the complexity, variation and drivers of movement-related behaviours promise new insight into fundamental components of ecology. Resolving the multidimensionality of spatially explicit behaviour remains a challenge for investigating tactics and their relation to niche construction, but high-resolution movement data are providing unprecedented understanding of the diversity of spatially explicit behaviours. We introduce a framework for investigating individual variation in movement-defined resource selection that integrates the behavioural and ecological niche concepts. We apply it to long-term tracking data of 115 African elephants (Loxodonta africana), illustrating how a behavioural hypervolume can be defined based on differences between individuals and their ecological settings, and applied to explore population heterogeneity. While normative movement behaviour is frequently used to characterise population behaviour, we demonstrate the value of leveraging heterogeneity in the behaviour to gain greater insight into population structure and the mechanisms driving space-use tactics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations73
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology LettersSame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207