MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408953735 · doi:10.1080/15594491.2024.2444034

Consistency of two-voice vocalizations as a possible performance metric in a widespread songbird

2025· article· en· W4408953735 on OpenAlexaff
Song Gu, Neil E. Sathi, Caroline Dingle, Karan J. Odom

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Wilson Journal of Ornithology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsCapilano University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSongbirdConsistency (knowledge bases)Metric (unit)Vocal communicationGeographyCommunicationEcologyPsychologyComputer scienceBiologyArtificial intelligenceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Birdsong is subject to performance constraints due to structural limitations of the syrinx and other anatomy involved in song production. Therefore, certain vocalizations may be difficult to produce and perform consistently (like a challenging performance or athletic feat). In this case, the ability to consistently produce a difficult birdsong could be a quality indicator or performance metric. An individual bird’s ability to consistently produce two-voice vocalizations characterized on the spectrogram by the appearance of two distinct frequencies overlapping in time, could be one such performance metric. To test this, we measured and compared the structure and consistency in frequency and time metrics between notes with and without two-voice (overlapping) note structure in songs of Oriental Magpie-Robins (Copsychus saularis), a widespread Southeast Asian species. We found that all frequency and time values measured were significantly different for two-voice and non-two-voice notes, indicating structural differences between two-voice and non-two-voice notes. In a comparison of the coefficients of variation of frequency and time metrics, only the coefficient of variation for 90% bandwidth was significantly different between two-voice and non-two-voice notes. Bandwidth was significantly more variable for two-voice notes than for non-two-voice notes, indicating that bandwidth was more inconsistently performed for two-voice notes than for non-two-voice notes. Thus, producing notes with consistent bandwidth while producing overlapping frequencies could be challenging and therefore a performance constraint. Our results suggest that this could be an interesting avenue for future research.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Wilson Journal of OrnithologySame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207