MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1944673033 · doi:10.2458/azu_rc.57.18678

Response to Bonsall et al. “Food for Thought: Re-Assessing Mesolithic Diets in the Iron Gates”

2015· article· en· W1944673033 on OpenAlexaff
Olaf Nehlich, Dušan Borić

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiocarbon · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMesolithicReliability (semiconductor)Radiocarbon datingArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here, we reply to the attempt by Bonsall et al. (2015) to re-assess our results from the sulfur isotopic study of bone collagen from Mesolithic and Neolithic sites along the Danube in the Iron Gates Gorges area (Nehlich et al. 2010). Although we are highly interested to see our data re-assessed, we found certain misinterpretations, mistaken assumptions, and factual errors regarding our results. Therefore, we want to respond and re-assess our previous data, too. We establish for a few individuals a quantitative dietary reconstruction to demonstrate the reliability of our earlier interpretations.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiocarbonSame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207