MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409410798 · doi:10.1007/s11186-024-09589-w

Exponential expansions in social evolution: the case of per capita income averages in the U.S.

2025· article· en· W4409410798 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Hammond

Bibliographic record

VenueTheory and Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic theories and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPer capita incomePer capitaExponential functionExponential growthDemographic economicsEconomicsEconometricsMathematicsSociologySocioeconomicsDemographyMathematical analysisPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The exponential expansion of per capita incomes over the last centuries in tech driven economies like that of the U.S. is the most recent in a long series of social creations marked by one or another exponential expansion. The origins of the deep attraction to these enhancements are found in the evolutionary heritage of our expanded cognitive and affective capacities. These evolved capacities have always marked the exponentially rising learning curve in the rapid language acquisition of young humans. They have also played a role in the emergence of religion as an explanation scaffolding from our context of origin onwards. After the exodus from our context of origin into larger and larger populations, they helped shape the emergence of the inflated ascriptive inequality that grew as individuals struggled to find a framework to make and assess status claims at these larger social scales. Among many other changes, the exponential expansion of per capita income averages over the last centuries in economies that first embraced systematic technological innovation and diffusion provided an alternative material enhancement for status differentiation throughout a population. The contrasting labor-saving and disruption costs of this fourth enhancement have played a role in the remarkably steady pattern of a multi-century per capita growth rate average in the U.S. of just under 2% per year.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheory and SocietySame topicEconomic theories and modelsFrench-language works237,207