Habituation to a predatory stimulus in a harvester (Arachnida, Opiliones)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several studies have investigated habituation in a defensive context, but few have addressed responses to dangerous stimuli. In such cases, animals should not habituate since this could cost their lives. Here we have stimulated individuals of the harvester Mischonyx squalidus with a predatory stimulus (squeezing with tweezers) in repeated trials within and between days, and measured the occurrence and magnitude of nipping, a defensive behavior. Contrary to our expectations, they did habituate to this stimulus. The probability and magnitude of response declined over trials during each of three days of testing in a typical habituation pattern. During the trials we also observed other defensive behaviors. We discuss our results mainly considering alternative defensive responses. Our data show that we lack information on (1) the role played by the ambiguity of stimuli, (2) the role played by subsequent stimuli and (3) the importance of the array of defensive behaviors of a species in understanding habituation. Although ubiquitous across animals and therefore expected, habituation is described for the first time in the order Opiliones.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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 it