Behavioral and physiological evidence that increasing group size ameliorates the impacts of social disturbance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Intra-group social stability is important for the long-term productivity and health of social organisms. We evaluated the effect of group size on group stability in the face of repeated social perturbations using a cooperatively breeding fish, Neolamprologus pulcher . In a laboratory study, we compared both the social and physiological responses of individuals from small versus large groups to the repeated removal and replacement of the most dominant group member (the breeder male). Individuals living in large groups were overall more resistant to instability but were seemingly slower to recover from perturbation. Members of small group were more vulnerable to instability but recovered faster. Breeder females in smaller groups also showed greater physiological preparedness for instability following social perturbations. In sum, we recover both behavioral and physiological evidence that living in larger groups helps to dampen the impacts of social instability in this system. S ummary S tatement Social stability is vital for group productivity and long-term persistence. Here, both behavioral and physiological evidence conveys that larger groups are less susceptible to social disturbance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".