MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6948687047 · doi:10.5061/dryad.tqjq2bw5n

Exposure to humans and task difficulty levels affect wild raccoons (Procyon lotor) learning

2024· dataset· en· W6948687047 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2024
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCentral European national history
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask (project management)Affect (linguistics)CognitionFlexibility (engineering)Cognitive flexibilityWildlifeAnimal cognitionExploit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognition helps wildlife exploit novel resources and environments. Raccoons (Procyon lotor) have successfully adapted to human presence in part due to their cognitive abilities. However, close interactions between humans and wildlife can create conflicts. A better understanding of the raccoon’s behavioral flexibility and learning ability could improve the mitigation of those conflicts. Learning can be evaluated over multiple exposures to a cognitive task. Our objective is to evaluate wild raccoons learning in contexts varying in terms of exposure to humans (recreational and preservation zoning within protected areas) and task difficulty. We used two food extraction tasks to measure how problem-solving performance varied between trials based on success probability and time to solve the puzzles.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.008

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.300 · 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