Tracking the Migration of the Monarch Butterflies with the World's Smallest Computer
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Each fall, millions of monarch butterflies across the U.S. and Canada migrate up to 4,000 km to overwinter in the same cluster of mountaintops in central Mexico. In spring, these migrants mate and remigrate northwards to repopulate their northern breeding territory over 2-4 partially overlapping generations. Because each migrant monarch completes only part of this round trip and does not return to the overwintering site, this navigational task cannot be learned from the prior generation. The number of monarchs completing the journey has dramatically declined in the past decades, coincident with the decreased availability of their milkweed host plant. The U.S., Mexico, and Canada have invested tremendous resources into monarch conservation efforts, including enacting specific policy initiatives, public outreach programs, and habitat protection and restoration projects. The US invested over $11 million between 2015-2017 alone [1]. Developing a tracking technology for monarch can be a key in these efforts, providing, for instance, detailed understanding of habitat use during migratory flight and dependence on weather conditions. Furthermore, it can significantly benefit animal research, and agricultural and environmental science.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it