MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906606145 · doi:10.2993/0278-0771-38.4.589

Peanuts and Power in the Andes: The Social Archaeology of Plant Remains from the Virú Valley, Peru

2018· article· en· W2906606145 on OpenAlexaff
Lindi Masur, Jean‐François Millaire, Michael Blake

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ethnobiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPacific and Southeast Asian Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaWestern UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolityArchaeologyEliteGeographyPrehistoryExcavationSocial practiceEscarpmentConsumption (sociology)HistoryEthnologyPoliticsSociologyPolitical scienceLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present new data highlighting the symbolic and ritual association of peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) on the north coast of Peru during the Early Intermediate Period (200 BC to AD 800). Recent paleoethnobotanical work at the two Virú polity sites of Huaca Gallinazo and Huaca Santa Clara has revealed a distinctive distribution of peanut remains in contexts associated with elite and ceremonial practice, including performative feasting and burial ritual. In contrast, peanuts were rarely recovered from domestic spaces associated with quotidian practice. Furthermore, unlike staple crops such as maize (Zea mays) or beans (Phaseolus spp.), their low frequencies in state-run storage facilities suggest peanuts did not have a significant role in the polity-wide redistribution economy. Information drawn from historical documents and archaeological excavation beyond the Virú Valley likewise suggests differential consumption of peanuts, which were largely linked to ritual practice across the greater Andean region.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EthnobiologySame topicPacific and Southeast Asian StudiesFrench-language works237,207