Playful mouth‐to‐mouth interactions of belugas (<i>Delphinapterus leucas</i>) in managed care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".