MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6903134057 · doi:10.7939/r3-98d2-3g50

Mathematical methods for exploring the cognitive drivers of animal movement

2023· dissertation· en· W6903134057 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiffusion and Search Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariation (astronomy)Leverage (statistics)Resource (disambiguation)CognitionMovement (music)Cognitive mapSpatial learningAnimal learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spatial distributions of animals have fascinated scientists for centuries. Understanding where animals go and why helps ecologists conserve their populations. Technological advances during the 21st century have allowed scientists to record the spatial location of animals over time, motivating the development of models that explain these patterns. Animals use external factors, such as qualities of their environments, and internal processes, such as memory, when deciding where to move. Interest in models that relate these internal processes to movement has increased in the last decade. In this thesis, I expand on existing work to model how perception, memory, and learning affects the way animals move. The methods described here incorporate different mathematical perspectives with a collective goal of identifying how moving animals account for temporal variation in their environments, predictable or unpredictable. Temporal environmental variation results from many biological processes. When this variation is directly caused by animals themselves (e.g., through resource depletion), these animals navigate away from patches they visited (and depleted) recently. Resources may also vary independently from the animal, and when this variation is predictable, animals may benefit from learning schedules of resource availability. Chapter 2 describes a model that uses animal tracking data to identify patch revisitation patterns. The model’s ability to quantify these patterns was verified on simulated data before being fit to brown bear (Ursus arctos) data from the Canadian Arctic. These bears live in an environment where food resources vary seasonally, and the model suggested that they use spatiotemporal memory to leverage these predictable patterns. Using advanced model-fitting techniques to obtain maximum likelihood estimates and confidence intervals, the model suggested that brown bears wait approximately one year before navigating to resource-rich patches they visited previously. When temporal variation in an animal’s environment is not so predictable, animals must learn and adjust their foraging behaviour to survive. Psychologists and ecologists have theorized that animal learning resembles Bayesian inference, suggesting that animals refine their prior knowledge by incorporating the outcome of subsequent experiences (data). Chapter 4 incorporates this theory into a mechanistic model that simulates how animals learn, using Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling to model how animals optimize a task with a quantifiable outcome. Using a mechanistic model that simulates the movement of spatially informed foragers within a home range, we apply this framework to predict how animals may learn to adjust to rapid and unpredictable changes in their environments. At larger spatial scales, predictable temporal variation in the environment may give rise to migratory behaviour. Chapter 5 presents a model that can statistically identify the beginning and end of migration from animal tracking data. This model can be used to partition animal location data into biologically reasonable behavioural segments for further analysis. Movement ecologists have used statistical models to identify important biological patterns from data, and mechanistic models can incorporate causal links to make important predictions about how animals may move in the future. The work presented in this thesis advances movement ecology by introducing statistical and mechanistic tools that describe how cognitive processes inform animal foraging patterns.

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.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.264 · 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