MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135749491 · doi:10.1017/s0962728600024908

Rats Demand Social Contact

2002· article· en· W3135749491 on OpenAlexaff
Emily Patterson-Kane, Maree Hunt, David N. Harper

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Welfare · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCageSocial contactAnimal welfareBusinessSpace (punctuation)Scale (ratio)Demographic economicsPublic economicsEconomicsPsychologyComputer scienceGeographySocial psychologyBiologyEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract There is some evidence that rats benefit from social housing and from some forms of environmental enrichment, such as platforms and shelters. It is less clear whether they benefit from more spacious cages. There is a lack of information about the relative benefits of social contact, enrichment and increased space, because existing studies tend to concentrate on only one of these variables at a time. The current experiment used economic demand procedures as a method to compare, on a single scale, qualitatively different environments with a standard home cage. The data indicate that rats show a high demand for social contact, and a low demand for a larger cage or one containing pillars or novel objects. This finding suggests that social housing of laboratory rats should be strongly advocated.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 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

Citations76
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal WelfareSame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207