The Platyrrhine Primate Cebus imitator Uses Gaze to Manipulate and Withdraw Food to the Mouth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Orienting a food item held in the hand to withdraw and optimally place it in the mouth for eating (withdraw-to-eat) is mediated by vision in catarrhine anthropoids and by nonvisual strategies in strepsirrhine primates. The present study asks whether vision contributes to the withdraw-to-eat movements in a platyrrhine anthropoid Cebus imitator, a member of a monophyletic primate suborder whose stem group diverged from catarrhines about 40 million years ago. Cebus imitator’s gaze and hand use for foraging for fruit is examined in its fine branch niche, the terminal branches of trees. Video of reach, grasp and withdraw-to-eat movements with associated gaze were examined frame-by-frame to assess food manipulation and its sensory control. Cebus imitator uses vision and touch to reach for and grasp food items with precision and whole hand grasps. They use vision to orient food items held in-hand into a precision grip and their withdraw-to-eat is assisted with a vertically oriented hand. The conjoint use of vision, a precision grasp, and hand posture and a central representation of object control likely originated in stem anthropoids and was derived from the staged evolution of the visual manipulation of food and other objects.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".