MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990837970 · doi:10.1016/j.neures.2019.11.010

Phase transitions of brain evolution that produced human language and beyond

2019· review· en· W2990837970 on OpenAlexafffund
Rafael Vieira Bretas, Yumiko Yamazaki, Atsushi Iriki

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroscience Research · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLanguage and cultural evolution
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsCognitionNiche constructionHuman languageHuman brainEcological nichePhase transitionSelection (genetic algorithm)Artificial neural networkNatural selectionPhase (matter)Computer scienceTransition (genetics)NeuroscienceCognitive scienceVariation (astronomy)Cognitive psychologyEvolutionary biologyPsychologyBiologyArtificial intelligencePhysicsEcologyLinguisticsAstrophysicsCondensed matter physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The brain capacity of human ancestors underwent two phase transitions, which were supported by preadaptations during the animal protolanguage period, resulting in the emergence of human language. The transitions were (1) the emergence of the primate cerebral cortex, with its unique characteristic of additional cortical areas together with size expansion, and (2) the replacement of natural selection as the main evolutionary mechanism by triadic niche construction, an interactive expansion of ecological-, neural-, and cognitive-niches. These phase transitions accelerated the expansion of the hominid brain, exceeding the neural capacity threshold required for the emergence of language. Extrapolating these developments enabled the researchers to predict a third phase transition, which may be induced by the current explosion of artificial intelligence, accelerating human cognitive capacities to the next threshold required for a novel mode of language.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.289
GPT teacher head0.545
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroscience ResearchSame topicLanguage and cultural evolutionFrench-language works237,207