MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312683527 · doi:10.46867/ijcp.2009.22.04.02

The Behavioral Development of Two Beluga Calves During the First Year of Life

2009· article· en· W4312683527 on OpenAlexaff
Heather M. Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Comparative Psychology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsSt. Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeluga WhaleBelugaBiologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychologyZoologyAnimal scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently, very little formal research exists regarding the behavioral development of beluga calves ( Delphinapterus leucas ). The behaviors and interactions of two beluga calves born into the care of humans were observed consistently from birth to 12 months. Changes in behavior were recorded continuously for 20 minutes for each mother-calf pair 2 to 4 times a week. As expected, the primary calf activity involved swimming with mother, which gradually decreased over the first year of life. Calves initiated the majority of their separations from and reunions with their mothers. Unexpectedly,the calves demonstrated an early independence and primary responsibility for proximity maintenance to their mothers. The calves also engaged in more solitary swims, object play, and interactions with each other across the year. In summary, the two calves followed developmental trends that were similar to each other and to other cetaceans in the care of humans.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 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

Citations30
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Comparative PsychologySame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207