Sources of intraspecific variation in the collective tempo and synchrony of ant societies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Populations of independently oscillating agents can sometimes synchronize. In the context of animal societies, conspicuous synchronization of activity is known in some social insects. However, the causes of variation in synchrony within and between species have received little attention. We repeatedly assessed the short-term activity cycle of ant colonies (Temnothorax rugatulus) and monitored the movements of individual workers and queens within nests. We detected persistent differences between colonies in the waveform properties of their collective activity oscillations, with some colonies consistently oscillating much more erratically than others. We further demonstrate that colony crowding reduces the rhythmicity (i.e., the consistent timing) of oscillations. Workers in both erratic and rhythmic colonies spend less time active than completely isolated workers, but workers in erratic colonies oscillate out of phase with one another. We further show that the queen’s absence can impair the ability of colonies to synchronize worker activity and that behavioral differences between queens are linked with the waveform properties of their 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".