A new data-driven paradigm for the study of avian migratory navigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Avian navigation has fascinated researchers for many years. Yet, despite a vast amount of literature on the topic it remains a mystery how birds are able to find their way across long distances while relying only on cues available locally and reacting to those cues on the fly. Navigation is multi-modal, in that birds may use different cues at different times as a response to environmental conditions they find themselves in. It also operates at different spatial and temporal scales, where different strategies may be used at different parts of the journey. This multi-modal and multi-scale nature of navigation has however been challenging to study, since it would require long-term tracking data along with contemporaneous and co-located information on environmental cues. In this paper we propose a new alternative data-driven paradigm to the study of avian navigation. That is, instead of taking a traditional theory-based approach based on posing a research question and then collecting data to study navigation, we propose a data-driven approach, where large amounts of data, not purposedly collected for a specific question, are analysed to identify as-yet-unknown patterns in behaviour. Current technological developments have led to large data collections of both animal tracking data and environmental data, which are openly available to scientists. These open data, combined with a data-driven exploratory approach using data mining, machine learning and artificial intelligence methods, can support identification of unexpected patterns during migration, and lead to a better understanding of multi-modal navigational decision-making across different spatial and temporal scales.
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 | 0.017 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".