Bibliographic record
Abstract
The earliest graphic evidence for the Sanpedro cactus occurs in north-coastal Cupisnique Culture (1500–500 BC) with ceramic depictions of the cactus by itself or more frequently associated with felines and stepped volutes. In Chavin Culture (1200–500 BC), the cactus is found in lithic sculpture associated with the “Smiling God.” By Moche times (AD 100–800), Sanpedro is held in the hands of hooded females depicted alone in Moche I and II. By Moche IV there is a proliferation of these females conducting curing ceremonies. An important Sanpedro association in early Moche is with mountains. By Moche IV one ceramic depicts a blood sacrifice at the foot of a five-peaked mountain which recent research has demonstrated to be Cerro Campana, a mountain invoked by contemporary curanderas located midway between Huaca de la Luna in the Moche Valley and Huaca Cao Viejo in the Chicama Valley. Cosmograms at both of these sites are mirror-images of each other. The backgrounds of these painted reliefs include images that may be slices of Sanpedro. In the two reliefs the tripartite structuring of icons expressing a “complementarity of opposites” recurs in Cuzco’s Coricancha cosmogram and the organization of power objects on contemporary curandero altars (mesas). In Lambayeque Culture (AD 800–1100) the hooded female is depicted alone holding Sanpedro. In Chimú Culture (AD. 900–1470) there is a paucity of Sanpedro depictions probably reflecting a divergence of grass-roots curanderismo from a fully-formed state religion, a situation that continues to the present.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".