MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6983332833

Marriage outside of kinship

2022· book-chapter· en· W6983332833 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenEdition (OpenEdition) · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClanKinshipPoliticsMoorsFlexibility (engineering)Quarter (Canadian coin)PastoralismPsychological resilience
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Tubu are Saharan-Sahelian herders whose area, centred in Northern Chad covers a quarter of the Sahara, spilling into Libya in the north, Niger in the west and Sudan in the East. Broadly speaking, their lifestyle is comparable to that of the other nomads, living off extensive camel farming in this wide climatic belt of the Sahara-Sahel, stretching out from Senegal to the Red Sea. But in their marriage rules, the Tubu are radically different from the other cultural groups that constitute the Moors in the west, the Tuaregs and various other Bedouin tribes in the north and in the east. For them, marriage is rigorously forbidden within cognatic kinship, either close or distant, contrary to the other herders who tend to favour marriage among cousins. This marriage rule, of which they are very proud, forces them to endlessly look for new alliances which materialise through important livestock transfers between the various family units. It is on this basis that they have built a society where interpersonal networks count as much —if not more— than clans or lineages. As a result, they display great flexibility and resilience that sheds light on the motives of the political anarchy which, as a matter of fact, characterises these herders.

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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenEdition (OpenEdition)→Same topicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→