MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213453615 · doi:10.1111/eth.13273

Canada jays (<i>Perisoreus canadensis</i>) identify and exploit coniferous cache locations using visual cues

2022· article· en· W4213453615 on OpenAlexafffundabout
R.J. Martin, Matthew Fuirst, David F. Sherry

Bibliographic record

VenueEthology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCacheForagingExploitSensory cueIdentification (biology)BiologySelection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceEcologyNeuroscienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Food caching is a foraging strategy used by many vertebrates, involving the storage and subsequent recovery of food items for later consumption, when other food sources are scarce. Once cached, stored food, particularly highly perishable items, can degrade over time. Evidence suggests that for birds, some conifers may aid in cache preservation through protective properties in resin. However, due to the challenges involved with following birds to their caching locations, cache‐site preferences are not easily studied in the wild. We investigated eight captive Canada jays’ ( Perisoreus canadensis ) ability to both identify and exploit conifer tree species. Further, we examined potential cues that birds may use to identify and select these potentially beneficial sites. We found strong evidence to suggest that birds can quickly identify conifer tree species and subsequently exploit those cache locations preferentially. Furthermore, our evidence suggests that although birds do not appear to use olfactory cues when making caching decisions, they potentially to attend to structural cues. We suggest that visual information is essential to both the identification of conifer trees and to cache‐site selection decisions. These findings indicate that jays make rapid, fine scale assessments of their environments, discriminating amongst trees of different species and use this information to select cache‐sites.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207