MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2569101588 · doi:10.1111/geb.12563

Process‐based modelling shows how climate and demography shape language diversity

2017· article· en· W2569101588 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

VenueGlobal Ecology and Biogeography · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLanguage and cultural evolution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Evolutionary Synthesis CenterNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMacroecologySpecies richnessDiversity (politics)PopulationDistribution (mathematics)EcologyGeographyProcess (computing)Computer scienceDemographySociologyMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim Two fundamental questions about human language demand answers: why are so many languages spoken today and why is their geographical distribution so uneven? Although hypotheses have been proposed for centuries, the processes that determine patterns of linguistic and cultural diversity remain poorly understood. Previous studies, which relied on correlative, curve‐fitting approaches, have produced contradictory results. Here we present the first application of process‐based simulation modelling, derived from macroecology, to examine the distribution of human groups and their languages. Location The Australian continent is used as a case study to demonstrate the power of simulation modelling for identifying processes shaping the diversity and distribution of human languages. Methods Process‐based simulation models allow investigators to hold certain factors constant in order to isolate and assess the impact of modelled processes. We tested the extent to which a minimal set of processes determines the number and spatial distribution of languages on the Australian continent. Our model made three basic assumptions based on previously proposed, but untested, hypotheses: groups fill unoccupied spaces, rainfall limits population density and groups divide after reaching a maximum population. Results Remarkably, this simple model accurately predicted the total number of languages (average estimate 406, observed 407), and explained 56% of spatial variation in language richness on the Australian continent. Main conclusions Our results present strong evidence that current climatic conditions and limits to group size are important processes shaping language diversity patterns in Australia. Our study also demonstrates how simulation models from macroecology can be used to understand the processes that have shaped human cultural diversity across the globe.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.257 · 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