MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963225286 · doi:10.1098/rsif.2013.1208

A minimal model of predator–swarm interactions

2014· article· en· W2963225286 on OpenAlexaff
Yuxin Chen, Théodore Kolokolnikov

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Royal Society Interface · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwarm behaviourPredatorBiologyBiological systemComputer scienceEcologyPredation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a minimal model of predator-swarm interactions which captures many of the essential dynamics observed in nature. Different outcomes are observed depending on the predator strength. For a 'weak' predator, the swarm is able to escape the predator completely. As the strength is increased, the predator is able to catch up with the swarm as a whole, but the individual prey is able to escape by 'confusing' the predator: the prey forms a ring with the predator at the centre. For higher predator strength, complex chasing dynamics are observed which can become chaotic. For even higher strength, the predator is able to successfully capture the prey. Our model is simple enough to be amenable to a full mathematical analysis, which is used to predict the shape of the swarm as well as the resulting predator-prey dynamics as a function of model parameters. We show that, as the predator strength is increased, there is a transition (owing to a Hopf bifurcation) from confusion state to chasing dynamics, and we compute the threshold analytically. Our analysis indicates that the swarming behaviour is not helpful in avoiding the predator, suggesting that there are other reasons why the species may swarm. The complex shape of the swarm in our model during the chasing dynamics is similar to the shape of a flock of sheep avoiding a shepherd.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations116
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Royal Society InterfaceSame topicMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology ModelsFrench-language works237,207