Tufted Puffins (Fratercula Cirrhata) Respond to Predation Danger During Colony Approach Flights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In spite of their putative importance in the evolution of certain traits (e.g., nocturnality, coloniality, cliff nesting), the effects of aerial predators on behavior of adult seabirds at colonies have been poorly investigated. We hypothesized that Tufted Puffins (Fratercula cirrhata) respond to danger posed by aerial predators by modifying their behavior to mitigate danger. We observed Tufted Puffins making repeated colony fly-ins and departures and characterized (1) the timing of this behavior, (2) the activity rate (number of birds arriving or departing), and (3) the risk-level of activity, with respect to predation danger posed by Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and Peregrine Falcons (Falco peregrinus). As we predicted, we found that Tufted Puffins (1) dilute danger by synchronizing their fly-in and departure activities, (2) reduce fly-in and departure activity rates when predators are present, and (3) switch to lower-risk fly-in activities (e.g., staying over water where they have an escape route from an aerial attack) when predators are present. Réaction de Fratercula cirrhata au Danger de Prédation au cours des Vols d'Approche de la Colonie
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".