Wild raccoons demonstrate flexibility and individuality in innovative problem-solving
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive skills, such as innovative problem-solving, are hypothesized to aid animals in urban environments. However, the significance of innovation in wild populations, and its expression across individuals and socio-ecological conditions, is poorly understood. To identify how and when innovation arises in urban-dwelling species, we used advanced technologies and new testing and analytical methods to evaluate innovative problem-solving abilities of wild raccoons ( Procyon lotor ). We deployed multi-compartment puzzle boxes with either one or multiple solution types and identified raccoons using radio frequency identification. Raccoons solved these novel extractive foraging tasks, and their success was influenced by age and exploratory diversity. Successful raccoons always discovered multiple different solution types, highlighting flexible problem-solving. Using a unique, comparative sequence analysis approach, we found that variation in raccoon solving techniques was greater between individuals than within individuals, and this self-similarity intensified during times of competition. Finally, the inclusion of an easier solution in the multi-solution trials enabled previously unsuccessful raccoons to bootstrap their learning and successfully open multiple difficult solutions. Our study suggests that innovative problem-solving is probably influenced by many factors and has provided novel field and analytical methods, as well as new insights on the socio-ecological dynamics of urban populations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".