Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This chapter synthesizes a program of research devoted to developing a scientific framework for understanding human cultural evolution using studies with human participants, computational models, and mathematical analyses. The research program focuses on a set of questions that are interrelated in that each step toward a solution to one of these questions provides fragmented glimpses of solutions to the others. The questions are: 1.How did the capacity for creative culture evolve? Although cultural transmission (in which one individual acquires elements of culture from another) is observed in many species, cultural evolution (in which elements of culture are not just transmitted but adaptively modified) is much rarer, and perhaps unique to our species. Research in psychology, neuroscience, anthropology, archaeology, and genetics, as well as mathematical and computational modelling, is increasingly converging toward a consistent picture of the cognitive and concomitant neural changes over the last few million years that enabled humans to not just understand their world, but transform it.2.What fuels cultural innovation? While the first branch of the research program focuses on historical, biologically evolved changes in the cognitive abilities underlying cultural evolution, this branch is focused on understanding in a precise, rigorous way the mechanisms underlying the creative processes by which cultural novelty is generated. In other words, it aims to understand the process by which existing knowledge and experience comes together to generate new technologies, songs, artworks, scientific theories, and so forth. 3.How does human culture evolve? A third branch of the research program seeks to understand how cultural evolution works, i.e., does culture evolve, as do biological organisms, through natural selection, or by some other means? Are biological and cultural evolution isomorphic, i.e., despite their superficial differences do they share a common algorithmic structure? By comparing and contrasting these two evolutionary processes, we gain a richer understanding of how evolutionary processes get started, and how they work.The research program synthesizes research on cultural evolution, evolutionary theory, and creativity, using tools such as agent-based models and autocatalytic networks. What unites these projects is the aim of developing a psychologically, neurologically, and evolutionarily plausible framework for how ideas unfold over time; not just in the minds of individuals, but through direct and indirect interactions amongst individuals. This interdisciplinary undertaking has the potential to help us understand where we came from, who we are, and where we may be headed.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».