MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209050985

Controversy on the Origin and Spread of Barley

2020· article· en· W3209050985 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jianhui Li, Jie Zhang, Renxiang Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Evolution and Biodiversity · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHordeum vulgareChinaDomesticationLatin AmericansGeographyCropPrehistoryRadiocarbon datingPoaceaeBiologyAgronomyPolitical scienceArchaeologyLawEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Barley is a cereal crop belonging to Genus Hordeum of the family of Gramineae with the Latin name as Hordeum vulgare L., is one of the first domesticated grains of the Fertile Crescent. The latest research shows that Tibet is not the center of world barley evolution, meaning that the Fertile Crescent is the only recognized center of world barley evolution. Between 5 000 BC and 1 500 BC, the Old World experienced a historical process that could be called “Food Globalisation in Prehistory”, and barley was spread to all parts of the world. The era and route from the Fertile Crescent to the west to Europe have been discussed by scholars and reached a consensus. The era and route of spreading eastward to China and India are still controversial due to lack of corresponding evidence. Especially regarding the route of barley to China. Recently, scholars from universities such as the University of Washington conducted radiocarbon ( 14 C) analysis of 70 barley samples from China and surrounding areas to determine the age of each sample. It was determined that at least in 2 000 BC, barley was introduced to China, but it was introduced. The route in China is still undetermined.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular Evolution and BiodiversitySame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207