Evaluating Cognitive Flexibility in Non-Human Primates under Ongoing Anthropogenic Environmental Changes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines how non-human primates (NHPs) use cognitive abilities to adapt their behaviour in changing environments. It is argued that while NHPs have developed cognitive adaptations to cope with resource loss, these abilities may be insufficient to counter ongoing population declines driven by human and environmental threats, such as deforestation and climate change. Simians, which are more social and active during the day, show a high level of cognitive flexibility, allowing them to respond to changes in food sources, seasonal shifts, and social interactions. Prosimians, on the other hand, tend to be nocturnal and solitary, relying more on biological traits such as enhanced senses, flexible diets, and spatial memory to survive in areas with limited resources. Despite these adaptations, both groups face growing threats from climate change, habitat loss, and other human activities. This study also points out gaps in current research, especially on wild and prosimian populations, which limits our understanding of how cognition may help NHPs survive in changing environments. To protect vulnerable primate species and their habitats, it is crucial to prioritise research and conservation efforts. This paper concludes that while NHPs have developed ways to cope with their surroundings, these skills are likely not enough to protect them from today's fast-changing environment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 teacher head, 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".