Mating Behavior in Australopithecus and Early Homo: A Review of The Diagnostic Potential of Dental Dimorphism.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dental dimorphism is one of the primary means by which the mating systems of extinct hominins are studied. Its use has been particularly significant for describing the behaviors of Australopithecus and early Homo, and consequently the factors involved in the evolution of our own species. Analysis however, has tended to produce ambiguous and contrasting results, with no firm agreement as to what mating strategies these genera practiced. Interpretation is confounded by numerous problems such as a generally poor understanding of how dental dimorphism develops in primates, and what factors influence its expression. It is also not well known how these factors interact with different aspects of the dentition and to what relative extent these aspects are diagnostic of mating behavior. The failure in many cases to firmly establish the sex of fossil specimens has likewise hampered the interpretations of sexual dimorphism and by extension, mating behavior. Lastly, the ability to correlate dental dimorphism with mating systems, even in living primates, has met with only moderate success. For these reasons it is argued that dental dimorphism be used only to support the most general assertions about hominin social behavior.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".