A Comparison of Maritime Archaic Indian and Intermediate Indian Site Distribution in Labrador
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is concerned with Maritime Archaic Indian and Intermediate Indian cultures in Labrador and the differences in site distribution patterns between these cultural periods. A brief summary of what is currently known about each culture is presented followed by an examination and comparison of site distribution. All known Maritime Archaic Indian and Intermediate Indian sites in Labrador are considered here. It is shown that over 91% of known Labrador Maritime Archaic Indian sites are located on the coast. In contrast, 56% of known Intermediate Indian sites in Labrador are found in the interior. These results support suggestions that the beginning of the Intermediate Indian period (approximately 3500 B. P.) was a time of change for Indian populations in Labrador and that the interior became much more important for Indian groups at that time (Fitzhugh 1972; Nagle 1978; Tuck n.d.). The possible meanings of these differences in site distribution patterns are discussed and suggestions for future research on this topic are given.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".