MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1845717730 · doi:10.1080/00438243.2015.1078740

Evaluating the impact of Black Sea flooding on the Neolithic of northern Turkey

2015· article· en· W1845717730 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Archaeology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and environmental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsHoloceneShoreFlood mythPrehistoryPeriod (music)Black seaFlooding (psychology)GeographyArchaeologyHistoryGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Originally formulated based on marine geological research concerned with the timing and tempo of the Black Sea infilling, the Black Sea flood Hypothesis (BSfH) argues that this process was a catastrophic event ~7150 BP that greatly impacted the prehistoric peoples who lived along the ancient shoreline. The resulting mass migration of peoples led to great transformations across Europe and southwest Asia. Continued research in the region has challenged the timing and impact of the event, arguing instead that it was neither sudden nor catastrophic. However, the BSfH continues to be invoked as a plausible explanation for the lack of early Holocene or Neolithic period sites in northern Turkey. Results from spatial modelling along the Turkish coast suggest that the explanatory power of the BSfH to explain this absence is exaggerated. Rather, other environmental and social factors must be considered in explaining the complete lack of early Holocene sites across the region.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.221 · 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