General/Specific, Local/Global: Comparing the Beginnings of Agriculture in the Horn of Africa (Ethiopia/Eritrea) and Southwest Arabia (Yemen)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Horn of Africa and Southwest Arabia are less than 30 km apart, yet the timing and nature of transitions to agriculture along the margins of the southern Red Sea differ substantially. This paper compares and contrasts the beginnings of agriculture in highland Ethiopia/Eritrea and Yemen. We evaluate the applicability of general models, emphasize social circumstances and particularities, and highlight the importance of differing spatiotemporal scales from interregional perspectives that address millennia-long changes across continents to local choices during human lifetimes. We consider why agriculture appears so much later than it does throughout the eastern Mediterranean and argue that the traditionally rigid distinction between the "origins" and "spread" of agriculture oversimplifies transitions along the southern Red Sea in which agriculture in some ways diffused to, and in other ways, uniquely originated in Southwest Arabia and the Horn of Africa. We concordantly maintain that, particularly when agriculture is considered a societal transformation, regions where agriculture appears comparatively later are as important to understanding transitions to agriculture as regions where agriculture appears earliest.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".