MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7038694304

Individual Factors Predicting the Disappearance and Reproductive Success of Vervet Monkeys (Chlorocebus pygerythrus)

2023· other· en· W7038694304 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicScarabaeidae Beetle Taxonomy and Biogeography
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersYork UniversityNational Geographic SocietyCanada Research ChairsWildlife Conservation Society
KeywordsBetweenness centralityReproductive successCentralitySocial network analysisSocial network (sociolinguistics)Social relationSocial group
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social network analysis (SNA) is an increasingly popular method of quantifying social interactions and relating these to individual characteristics. However, few studies have considered how demographic events influence social networks and how social position affects fitness among species that live around humans. Using the gambit of the group and proximity data, I performed SNA on vervet monkeys to determine how social centrality predicted which individuals were more likely to disappear and to have infants that survived past one year. Older males with a lower or decrease in social centrality were more likely to disappear, where older males were more likely to emigrate, and individuals who decreased in their eigenvector centrality were more likely to have a human-related death. Females with a greater betweenness tended to have greater infant survival rates. Overall, emigration was influenced by natural history while human-related disappearances and reproductive success were mediated by social position.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.150
Teacher spread0.136 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)→Same topicScarabaeidae Beetle Taxonomy and Biogeography→French-language works237,207→