MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1840342830 · doi:10.2993/etbi-35-03-566-584.1

Pharmacological Influences on the Neolithic Transition

2015· article· en· W1840342830 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

VenueJournal of Ethnobiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersUniversity of Melbourne
KeywordsEthnographySociologyEcologyAnthropologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While uncertainty remains as to the relative importance of the factors that propelled Neolithization at different sites, a model is gaining traction that proposes that cereal cultivation was adopted in part to produce alcohol for competitive feasting. The model ties together the emergence of two key phenomena – cereal cultivation and social inequality – and is supported by a variety of archaeological and ethnographic data. However pharmacological theory has not yet been explicitly deployed in the presentation of the model; rather its development has relied on a common-sense understanding of the effects of alcohol and its cross-cultural importance in social life. Our aim in this paper is to bring understandings of drug use from pharmacology and related disciplines to bear upon the challenge of explaining Neolithization. We find that pharmacological theory sheds light on the importance of alcohol and other mood-altering products of Neolithic farming. In particular there is support for some influence of pharmacoactivity on Neolithic social evolution, which might extend beyond a role in feasting to include modulation of responses to status hierarchies, increased residential densities, and more intense work schedules. We propose that pharmacological influences be incorporated into models of the Neolithic transition.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.240 · 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