MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4241933496 · doi:10.1093/condor/102.1.81

Sound Design for Vocalizations: Quality in the Woods, Consistency in the Fields

2000· article· en· W4241933496 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy J. Brown, Paul Handford

Bibliographic record

VenueOrnithological Applications · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitatRange (aeronautics)EcologyGrasslandEnvironmental scienceAcousticsGeographyBiologyPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The acoustic adaptation hypothesis (AAH) predicts that vocalizations intended for unambiguous long range communication should possess amplitude modulation (AM) characteristics such that the temporal patterning of amplitude degrades less than alternative patterns during transmission through native habitat. The specific predictions are that open habitat signals should be structured as rapid AM trills, whereas closed habitat signals should be structured as low-rate AM tonal whistles. To investigate the benefit of trill- and whistle-structured signals in open and closed habitats, respectively, a high and low carrier frequency set of four synthetic signals which ranged from rapid AM trills to low rate AM whistles were transmitted 3 hours after sunrise through five different habitat types ranging from closed mature forest to open grassland. Results indicate that, on average, whistles degrade less than trills in both habitats. Trills benefit in open habitats through their tendency to be received with a more consistent quality than whistles. Such differences in transmission consistency among AM patterns are not found in closed habitats. While not degrading less on average, lower frequency signals are received with a more consistent quality than are higher frequency signals of the same AM structure, in both open and closed habitats.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations38
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrnithological ApplicationsSame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207