Bibliographic record
Abstract
Among early modern humans, a woman would face stronger competition for a mate the further away she was from the equator. Men were less available because they 1) hunted over longer distances that increased male mortality proportionately and 2) were less able to offset the resulting man shortage through polygyny. The longer the winter, the costlier it became to provision a second wife and her children, since women could not gather food in winter. Women competed the most for mates in the 'continental Arctic,' where wandering herds were the main food source. Conversely, men competed the most for mates in the Tropics, particularly after year-round agriculture emerged. This means of subsistence allowed women to become primary food producers, thereby freeing men to take more wives. Because mate competition has varied in intensity among human populations, sexual selection has correspondingly varied in intensity for certain traits, often highly visible and colorful ones. Intense female-female competition may explain an unusual convergence of color traits in northern and eastern Europeans. Intense male-male competition may explain increased masculinization of body build in highly polygynous agricultural populations of sub-Saharan Africa.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".