↓ Skip to main content

Dynamic Substrate for the Physical Encoding of Sensory Information in Bat Biosonar

Overview of attention for article published in Physical Review Letters, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
2 Redditors

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Dynamic Substrate for the Physical Encoding of Sensory Information in Bat Biosonar
Published in
Physical Review Letters, April 2017
DOI 10.1103/physrevlett.118.158102
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Horseshoe bats have dynamic biosonar systems with interfaces for ultrasonic emission (reception) that change shape while diffracting the outgoing (incoming) sound waves. An information-theoretic analysis based on numerical and physical prototypes shows that these shape changes add sensory information (mutual information between distant shape conformations <20%), increase the number of resolvable directions of sound incidence, and improve the accuracy of direction finding. These results demonstrate that horseshoe bats have a highly effective substrate for dynamic encoding of sensory information.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 27%
Professor 3 12%
Other 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 3 12%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 11 42%
Physics and Astronomy 6 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 12%
Neuroscience 2 8%
Unknown 4 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 December 2019.
All research outputs
#1,455,582
of 32,950,213 outputs
Outputs from Physical Review Letters
#4,364
of 50,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,102
of 344,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Physical Review Letters
#87
of 541 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,950,213 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 50,032 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,552 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 541 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.