Distinct movement patterns generate stages of spider web-building
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The geometric complexity and stereotypy of spider webs have long generated interest in their algorithmic origin. Like other examples of animal architecture, web construction is the result of several assembly phases that are driven by distinct behavioral stages coordinated to build a successful structure. Manual observations have revealed a range of sensory cues and movement patterns used during web construction, but methods to systematically quantify the dynamics of these sensorimotor patterns are lacking. Here, we apply an analytical pipeline to quantify web-making behavior of the orb-weaver Uloborus diversus . Position tracking revealed stereotyped stages of construction that could occur in typical or atypical progressions across individuals. Using an unsupervised clustering approach, we identified general and stage-specific leg movements. A Hierarchical Hidden Markov Model revealed that stages of web-building are characterized by stereotyped sequences of actions largely shared across individuals, regardless of whether these stages progress in a typical or atypical fashion. Web stages could be predicted based on action-sequences alone, revealing that web-stages are a physical manifestation of underlying behavioral phases. Highlights Spider centroid trajectories indicate stereotyped progression of web-building stages. Unsupervised movement clustering reveals a shared set of movements which correspond to previously defined behaviors that define web-making across individuals. Stages of web-building use both stage-specific and non-specific behaviors. Stereotyped and distinct action sequences are predictive of stages of web-building.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".