MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970341350 · doi:10.31235/osf.io/nzv8d

Pathways to Social Inequality

2019· article· en· W2970341350 on OpenAlexaff
Hannah J. Haynie, Patrick H. Kavanagh, Fiona M. Jordan, Carol R. Ember, Russell D. Gray, Simon J. Greenhill, Kathryn R. Kirby, Geoff Kushnick, Bobbi S. Low, Ty Tuff, Bruno Vilela, Carlos A. Botero, Michael C. Gavin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsInequalitySocial inequalitySubsistence agricultureCausality (physics)Economic inequalityResource (disambiguation)EconomicsDevelopment economicsEconomic geographySociologyEcologyBiologyAgricultureComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social inequality is now pervasive in human societies, despite the fact that humans lived in relatively egalitarian, small-scale societies across most of our history. Prior literature highlights the importance of environmental conditions, economic defensibility, and wealth transmission for shaping early Holocene origins of social inequality. However, it remains untested whether the mechanisms that drive the evolution of inequality in recent human societies follow a similar trajectory. We conduct the first global analysis of pathways to inequality within modern human societies using structural equation modeling. Our analytical approach demonstrates that environmental conditions, resource intensification, and wealth transmission mechanisms impact various forms of social inequality via a complex web of causality. We further find that subsistence practices have a direct impact on some institutionalized forms of inequality. This work identifies drivers of social inequality in the modern world and demonstrates the application of structural equation modeling methods to investigate complex relationships between elements of human culture.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEvolutionary Game Theory and CooperationFrench-language works237,207