Interaction among the Complex Societies of Classic-Period Mesoamerica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article reviews archaeological evidence of interactions among the complex societies of Mesoamerica in the Classic period. All of the Classic-period (250–900 ad) societies of Mesoamerica carried on trade and diplomatic exchanges with their neighbors, but some were also involved in direct contacts over much greater distances. Long-distance exchange was structured to a considerable degree by the diversity of natural environments and the variety of ecological niches existing in Mesoamerica, particularly the contrast between highlands and lowlands. Cotton, cacao, rubber, salt, marine shell, and copal sap were desirable lowland and coastal products, while obsidian, nopal and maguey products, basalt, jadeite, and various semiprecious stones were primarily highland items. Other goods (e.g., decorated ceramics) acquired their value from the input of highly skilled labor. In many cases the goods and routes of these exchange systems had developed much earlier, for example, the movement of highland Guatemalan obsidian throughout the Maya region. In the Early Classic era they expanded and intensified, reflecting the growing formal relationships among the rulers and nobles of the various states—alliances sustained by intermarriage, reciprocal visits, frequent gift exchanges, and perhaps tribute.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".