The evolutionary maintenance of Lévy flight foraging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lévy flight is a type of random walk that characterizes the behaviour of many natural phenomena studied across a multiplicity of academic disciplines; within biology specifically, the behaviour of fish, birds, insects, mollusks, bacteria, plants, slime molds, t-cells, and human populations. The Lévy flight foraging hypothesis states that because Lévy flights can maximize an organism's search efficiency, natural selection should result in Lévy-like behaviour. Empirical and theoretical research has provided ample evidence of Lévy walks in both extinct and extant species, and its efficiency across models with a diversity of resource distributions. However, no model has addressed the maintenance of Lévy flight foraging through evolutionary processes, and existing models lack ecological breadth. We use numerical simulations, including lineage-based models of evolution with a distribution of move lengths as a variable and heritable trait, to test the Lévy flight foraging hypothesis. We include biological and ecological contexts such as population size, searching costs, lifespan, resource distribution, speed, and consider both energy accumulated at the end of a lifespan and averaged over a lifespan. We demonstrate that selection often results in Lévy-like behaviour, although conditional; smaller populations, longer searches, and low searching costs increase the fitness of Lévy-like behaviour relative to Brownian behaviour. Interestingly, our results also evidence a bet-hedging strategy; Lévy-like behaviour reduces fitness variance, thus maximizing geometric mean fitness over multiple generations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".