MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Basis of Navigation Across Species

2021· article· en· W3207754338 on OpenAlexaff
Cody A. Freas, Ken Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Psychology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForagingOrientation (vector space)Component (thermodynamics)Path integrationScale (ratio)Human–computer interactionCommunicationComputer sciencePsychologyEcologyArtificial intelligenceGeographyBiologyCartographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Animals navigate a wide range of distances, from a few millimeters to globe-spanning journeys of thousands of kilometers. Despite this array of navigational challenges, similar principles underlie these behaviors across species. Here, we focus on the navigational strategies and supporting mechanisms in four well-known systems: the large-scale migratory behaviors of sea turtles and lepidopterans as well as navigation on a smaller scale by rats and solitarily foraging ants. In lepidopterans, rats, and ants we also discuss the current understanding of the neural architecture which supports navigation. The orientation and navigational behaviors of these animals are defined in terms of behavioral error-reduction strategies reliant on multiple goal-directed servomechanisms. We conclude by proposing to incorporate an additional component into this system: the observation that servomechanisms operate on oscillatory systems of cycling behavior. These oscillators and servomechanisms comprise the basis for directed orientation and navigational behaviors.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.334 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations59
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of PsychologySame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207