MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410090465 · doi:10.1007/s10071-025-01954-1

Cognitive control of memory in a food-storing and a non-storing bird species

2025· article· en· W4410090465 on OpenAlexafffund
Emily Kathryn Brown, David F. Sherry, Robert R. Hampton

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Cognition · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersOffice of Research Infrastructure Programs, National Institutes of HealthEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCognitionCognitive psychologyBehavioural sciencesComparative cognitionPsychologyCognitive scienceBiologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scatter hoarding black-capped chickadees use memory to relocate hidden food, often after delays of hours or days. The ability of these birds to maintain accurate memories of the location and current status of many food caches while engaging in other distracting daily activities suggests that their memory may be especially resistant to competing cognitive load. We measured resistance to competing cognitive load during spatial memory tests in black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus) and a non-caching species, dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis). Birds were presented with two types of task. In the Discrimination task, birds learned by trial-and-error to select a target from among 2 distractors. In the Match-to-Sample task, birds viewed a sample which they had to remember in order to correctly select it from among two distractors at test. On two-thirds of trials, the tasks were presented Stand-Alone: after birds initiated a trial, they completed either a Discrimination or a Match-to-Sample task. The remaining trials were Concurrent causing a competing cognitive load: after birds intiated a trial, they saw the sample for the Match-to-Sample task, then completed a Discrimination during the retention interval, and finally completed a Match-to-Sample test. Competing cognitive load reduced accuracy of juncos significantly more than accuracy of chickadees. The need to encode and retain the locations of multiple food caches may have led to the evolution of enhanced cognitive control of memory in black-capped chickadees.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal CognitionSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207