MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2959392664 · doi:10.1101/705392

Network reaction norms: taking into account network position and network plasticity in response to environmental change

2019· preprint· en· W2959392664 on OpenAlexafffund
Tyler R. Bonnell, Chloé Vilette, S. Peter Henzi, Louise Barrett

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNational Research FoundationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsLeakey Foundation
KeywordsCentralitySocial network (sociolinguistics)Consistency (knowledge bases)Dynamic network analysisVariation (astronomy)Phenotypic plasticitySocial network analysisPsychologyComputer scienceMathematicsEcologyStatisticsBiologyArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent studies have highlighted the link between consistent inter-individual differences in behaviour and consistency in social network position. There is also evidence that network structures can show temporal dynamics, suggesting that consistency in social network position across time does not preclude some form of plasticity in response to environmental variation. To better consider variation in network position and plasticity simultaneously we introduce the network reaction norm (NRN) approach. As an illustrative example, we used behavioural data on chacma baboons, collected over a period of seven years, to construct a time series of networks, using a moving window. Applying an NRN approach with these data, we found that most of the variation in network centrality could be explained by inter-individual differences in mean centrality. There was also evidence, however, for individual differences in network plasticity. These differences suggest that environmental conditions may influence which individuals are most central, i.e., they lead to an individual x environment interaction. We suggest that expanding from measures of repeatability in social networks to network reaction norms can provide a more temporally nuanced way to investigate social phenotypes within groups, and lead to a better understanding of the development and maintenance of individual variation in social behaviour.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicEvolutionary Game Theory and CooperationFrench-language works237,207