Cognitive control of memory in a food-storing and a non-storing bird species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".