Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Andean region of South America and the island of Ireland both adopted agriculture in wildly divergent manners, leaving distinct marks on their individual cultures. This study presents an overview of the contrast in agricultural adoption (that is, plant and animal domestication) in both the Andes and Ireland, as well as the subsequent respective cultural effects of those adoption techniques. In order to properly understand this relationship, certain factors must first be examined, specifically the available environmental resources at the onset of human occupation in each region, followed by the early experimentation with local resources leading to plant and animal domesticates, and concluding with a cultural analysis of each locale in the wake of agricultural adoption. Both regions began in similar landscapes, offering ample coastal and terrestrial resources for their respective nomadic settlers. While the Andes gradually developed their plant and animal domesticates independently, Ireland abruptly adopted Eurasian-born systems and adjusted their cultural trajectory along this alternative path. By comparing these two agricultural histories, an immense cache of traditions and diversities come to light backed by archaeological discoveries and decades of scientific work in both regions, overall illustrating how past agricultural traditions have a meerdirect and immense influence on finer cultural structure.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.004 |
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".