MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379598946 · doi:10.1002/zoo.21788

Playful mouth‐to‐mouth interactions of belugas (<i>Delphinapterus leucas</i>) in managed care

2023· article· en· W4379598946 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueZoo Biology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyLeucasZoologyFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Belugas (Delphinapterus leucas) engage in many forms of play (e.g., object, water, locomotor), but no play is quite as curious as the unusual form of cooperative social play involving mouth-to-mouth interactions. These playful interactions are characterized by two belugas approaching each other head-to-head and interlocking their jaws, clasping one another, as if they were shaking hands. Observed in belugas both in the wild and in managed care, it is seemingly an important type of social play that offers a unique way of socializing with conspecifics. To describe this unusual behavior, a group of belugas in managed care was observed from 2007 to 2019. Although adults participated in mouth-to-mouth interactions, most were initiated and received by young belugas. Both males and females engaged in mouth-to-mouth interactions and did so at similar frequencies. Individual differences in how many mouth-to-mouth interactions were initiated among calves were also observed. Due to the unique, cooperative nature of mouth-to-mouth interactions, which require both social and motor skills, it is hypothesized that these interactions may be used to test social and motor competency.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.265 · 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