Directed retreat and navigational mechanisms in trail following Formica obscuripes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ant species exhibit behavioural commonalities when solving navigational challenges for successful orientation and to reach goal locations. These behaviours rely on a shared toolbox of navigational strategies that guide individuals under an array of motivational contexts. The mechanisms that support these behaviours, however, are tuned to each species' habitat and ecology with some exhibiting unique navigational behaviours. This leads to clear differences in how ant navigators rely on this shared toolbox to reach goals. Species with hybrid foraging structures, which navigate partially upon a pheromone-marked column, express distinct differences in their toolbox, compared to solitary foragers. Here, we explore the navigational abilities of the Western Thatching ant (Formica obscuripes), a hybrid foraging species whose navigational mechanisms have not been studied. We characterise their reliance on both the visual panorama and a path integrator for orientation, with the pheromone's presence acting as a non-directional reassurance cue, promoting continued orientation based on other strategies. This species also displays backtracking behaviour, which occurs with a combination of unfamiliar terrestrial cues and the absence of the pheromone, thus operating based upon a combination of the individual mechanisms observed in solitarily and socially foraging species. We also characterise a new form of goalless orientation in these ants, an initial retreating behaviour that is modulated by the forager's path integration system. The behaviour directs disturbed inbound foragers back along their outbound path for a short distance before recovering and reorienting back to the nest.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".