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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Piaroa are an example of a pacific society. Other examples are found world-wide, including the Semai (Robarchek 1989), !Kung (Drapper 1978), Chewong (Howell 1989), Balinese (Howe 1989), Inuit (Briggs 1978), Fore (Sorenson 1978), Fipa (Willis 1989), and in South America, the multi-ethinic complex of the Upper Xingu (Gregor 1990; Menget 1985). An evaluation of Piaroa ethno-etiological concepts of illness and misfortune, as well as their belief in the effectiveness of shamanic practices leads us to reconsider our definitions of their ideas. Physical violence is totally prohibited, but there are different levels of shamanic violence. It is totally absent within the sphere of the kin group and community. Shamanic violence increases among these units, and reaches its maximal level of expression among those Piaroa who live the greatest distance away and with the Mako-Wiro. It diminishes, however, among neighbouring and very different groups such as the Guahibo and Ye’kwana. We provide evidence which indicates that the daily practice of shamanic violence creates an atmosphere of generalized war, and conclude that the Piaroa, while controlling physical violence, regularly practice shamanic violence. Given that aggressive violence is symbolic war, we conclude that Piaroa pacifism should be redefined.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 it