MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984518558 · doi:10.7554/elife.50989.009

Author response: Insights into the evolution of social systems and species from baboon studies

2019· peer-review· en· W2984518558 on OpenAlexaff
Julia Fischer, James P. Higham, Susan C. Alberts, Louise Barrett, Jacinta C. Beehner, Thore J. Bergman, Alecia J. Carter, Anthony Collins, Sarah Elton, Joël Fagot, María Joana Ferreira da Silva, Kurt Hammerschmidt, S. Peter Henzi, Clifford J. Jolly, Sascha Knauf, Gisela H. Kopp, Jeffrey Rogers, Christian Roos, Caroline Ross, Robert M. Seyfarth, Joan B. Silk, Noah Snyder‐Mackler, Veronika Staedele, Larissa Swedell, Michael L. Wilson, Dietmar Zinner

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersLeibniz-GemeinschaftDirectorate for Biological SciencesDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftUniversity of CambridgeRoyal Society
KeywordsSocialityBaboonBiologyEcologyEvolutionary biologyPopulationFlexibility (engineering)GeographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Baboons, members of the genus Papio, comprise six closely related species distributed throughout sub-Saharan Africa and southwest Arabia.The species exhibit more ecological flexibility and a wider range of social systems than many other primates.This article summarizes our current knowledge of the natural history of baboons and highlights directions for future research.We suggest that baboons can serve as a valuable model for complex evolutionary processes, such as speciation and hybridization.The evolution of baboons has been heavily shaped by climatic changes and population expansion and fragmentation in the African savanna environment, similar to the processes that acted during human evolution.With accumulating long-term data, and new data from previously understudied species, baboons are ideally suited for investigating the links between sociality, health, longevity and reproductive success.To achieve these aims, we propose a closer integration of studies at the proximate level, including functional genomics, with behavioral and ecological studies.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1520.041

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPrimate Behavior and EcologyFrench-language works237,207