MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3007667262

Paleoindian Technology in Beringia— A Technological and Morphological Analysis of the Northern Fluted-Point Complex

2015· article· en· W3007667262 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Heather L. Smith

Notice bibliographique

RevueOakTrust (Texas A&M University Libraries) · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiquePleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBeringiaPoint (geometry)GeologyArchaeologyGeographyMathematicsPleistocene
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This project is the first comprehensive analysis of fluted projectile points found across arctic North America and encompasses three levels of analysis that increase in scope geographically, methodologically, and theoretically. The start of the project served to develop an understanding of the technological organization represented at the first archaeological site to provide a clear radiocarbon record for fluted points in Alaska, Serpentine Hot Springs. The fluted-point collection from Serpentine was then used as a benchmark to compare the greater collection of fluted-points found across northern Alaska and Yukon and understand whether they represent a cohesive complex, and the technological risk and adaptive role associated with fluted-point use in the late Pleistocene Arctic. Finally, an expanded technological and morphological analysis comparing northern fluted points to other fluted-point forms found throughout North America was conducted to investigate whether convergence or cultural transmission was responsible for the presence of fluted-point technology in the far north. The first phase of the project consisted of an assemblage level analysis of the lithic collection recovered from the Serpentine Fluted-point Site. The site contained buried fluted projectile-point fragments, an associated lithic assemblage, and charcoal-rich cultural features AMS-radiocarbon dated to approximately 12,000 calendar years before present, placing it within a Paleoindian timeframe. Interpretation of the technological organization used by the site’s occupants provides a glimpse of a logistical system of mobility practiced by Paleoindian groups in the Arctic.\n\nThe second phase of the project consisted of a technological and morphological analysis of 51 northern fluted points that included metric, non-metric, and qualitative variables, which were statistically evaluated and compared to a collection of 46 Folsom artifacts. A new approach to geometric morphometrics was developed to evaluate variability in point outline shape, which allowed the analysis to focus solely on fluted-point basal morphology. Results confirm that northern fluted points represent a cohesive technological strategy and may have served as a risk-management system promoting ease-of-replacement-after-failure to offset transport costs and reduce risk during long-distance travel.\n\nThe final phase of the project featured a geometric morphometric shape analysis of 200 fluted points and point fragments, representing the Northern Fluted Complex and fluted points from further south in Canada, the Great Plains, and northeastern United States, to investigate the origin of northern fluted points. Results identified geographic patterns in basal projectile-point morphology and technology suggesting that fluting technology was not independently invented in the north, but originated proximately from the Ice-Free Corridor and ultimately from Clovis. Northern fluted-point technology was culturally transmitted from the south and variability introduced during this process resulted in a distinct arctic variant of Paleoindian fluted-point technology: the Northern Fluted Complex.\n\nThis new form of fluted projectile point is unique to the Arctic, yet evident of cultural continuity and a Paleoindian adaptation that spread throughout North America at the end of the last ice age.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,141
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,004
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,028
Tête enseignante GPT0,231
Écart entre enseignants0,203 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueOakTrust (Texas A&M University Libraries)Même sujetPleistocene-Era Hominins and ArchaeologyTravaux en français237 207