MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

THE HIGH‐WATER MARK: THE SITING OF MEGALITHIC TOMBS ON THE SWEDISH ISLAND OF TJÖRN

2004· article· en· W1964731508 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford Journal of Archaeology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Reading
KeywordsMegalithArchaeologyNatural (archaeology)OutcropFishingQuarter (Canadian coin)GeographyBronze AgeGeologyGeomorphologyFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary. In 1977 Grahame Clark suggested that the siting of megalithic tombs along the west coast of Scandinavia reflected the distribution of productive fishing grounds. Unlike the situation in other parts of Europe, these monuments were not associated with agriculture. Opinions have varied over the last quarter century, but enough is now known about changes of sea‐level for his interpretation to be investigated on the ground. There seems to have been considerable diversity. On the large island of Örust some of the tombs located near to the sea appear to be associated with small natural enclosures defined by rock outcrops and may have been associated with grazing land. On the neighbouring island of Tjörn, however, the tombs were associated with small islands and important sea channels. During the Bronze Age the same areas included carvings of ships. Recent fieldwork in western Norway suggests that such locations were especially important in a maritime economy.

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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

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 studies0.0000.003
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.182 · 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