Deterioration of San rock art : new findings, new challenges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The heritage of San rock art in southern Africa is globally acknowledged, and was one of the primary reasons for the successful nomination of the uKhahlamba / Drakensberg Park in South Africa as a World Heritage Site. Deterioration of rock paintings in the reserve could adversely affect the international status of the region, particularly as little has been achieved with regard to preserving the art for future generations. A study is currently under way in the Injisuthi and Giant's Castle areas of the park, to investigate the deterioration of San art; this article serves to introduce the project and to highlight some initial findings. Previous research on the weathering of San paintings has focused largely on either monitoring rock shelters or investigating rock surfaces that are adjacent to the paintings. None of the methods applied in earlier investigations has considered the interface between rock and pigments, mainly because of the potential damage that may result from the use of tactile monitoring equipment. Recent advances in weathering research, using improved techniques to measure conditions at the rock surface where the San art is painted, provide new insights into surficial processes and suggest new lines of investigation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.028 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".