Mechanical Impact of Incisor Loading on the Primate Midfacial Skeleton and its Relevance to Human Evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The midfacial skeleton in the human lineage demonstrates a wide spectrum of variation that may be the consequence of different environmental and mechanical selective pressures. However, different facial configurations may develop under comparable selective regimes. For example, the Neanderthal high and projected face and the Inuit broad and flat face are hypothesized to be the consequence of (1) life in a cold climate, and (2) excessive paramasticatory stresses focused on the anterior dentition. In this study, the second of these two hypotheses is tested using finite element analyses of a monkey skull. Results indicate that incisor loading induces heavy stress in the anterior midface of macaques. Additional analyses using incremental increases in the anteroinferior tilt of the skull to simulate different magnitudes of facial projection revealed that comparable muscular force generates less stress in a less-projected face. However, the findings of our final analyses, which attempted to combine biting with the incisors and pulling with the hands, differed from the analyses that mimicked only incisor loading (without any sort of anterior pulling component). These findings suggest that shortening the face may be the most effective way to compensate for anterior dental loading but not necessarily offset the forces incurred when using the anterior dentition as a vice for various paramasticatory behaviors. Although Neanderthals may have frequently loaded their anterior dentition, countervailing selection pressures, such as the inclusion of tough foods in the diet that demanded molar grinding, may have selected for a longer face with a lower load- to lever-arm ratio.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".