MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392032661 · doi:10.5040/9798400696572

Peyote

2016· book· en· W4392032661 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPolitical scienceEthnologyHumanitiesGeographyArtEnvironmental ethicsSociologyPhilosophyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This book explains the role that peyote—a hallucinogenic cactus—plays in the religious and spiritual fulfillment of certain peoples in the United States and Mexico, and examines pressing issues concerning the regulation and conservation of peyote as well as issues of indigenous and religious rights. Why is mescaline—an internationally controlled substance derived from peyote—given exemptions for religious use by indigenous groups in Mexico, and by the pan-indigenous Native American Church in the United States and Canada? What are the intersections of peyote use, constitutional law, and religious freedom? And why are natural populations of peyote in decline—so much so that in Mexico, peyote is considered a species needing ""special protection"? This fascinating book addresses these questions and many more. It also examines the delicate relationship between "the needs of the plant"" as a species and "the needs of man" to consume the species for spiritual purposes. The authors of this work integrate the history of peyote regulation in the United States and the special "trust responsibility" relationship between the American Indians and the government into their broad examination of peyote, a hallucinogenic cactus containing mescaline that grows naturally in Mexico and southern Texas. The book's chapters document how when it comes to peyote, multiple stakeholders' interests are in conflict—as is often the case with issues that involve ethnic identity, religion, constitutional interpretation, and conservation. The expansion of peyote traditions also serves as a foundation for examining issues of international human rights law and protections for religious freedom within the global milieu of cultural transnationalism.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5270.256

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207