MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002865667 · doi:10.1002/gea.20164

Geoarchaeology of Tonga: Geotectonic and geomorphic controls

2007· article· en· W2002865667 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoarchaeology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPacific and Southeast Asian Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForearcGeologyTephraSubsidencePaleontologyGeoarchaeologyTrenchSubductionTerrigenous sedimentPumiceVolcanoEarth scienceArchaeologySedimentary rockTectonicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ancient settlement patterns in central Tonga, at the southeastern limit of Lapita expansion into Remote Oceania ˜3 ka, were conditioned by island geomorphology as controlled by spatial geotectonic features and temporal changes in relative sea level on island coasts. Volcanic islands provided lithic resources, but human populations were concentrated on nonvolcanic forearc islands underlain by limestone covered by airfall tephra blankets that weathered to form rich agricultural soils and eroded to provide terrigenous sand for ceramic temper. The forearc islands lie along the Tonga platform, a linear tract of shoals uplifted diachronously by subduction of the buoyant Louisville Ridge at the Tonga Trench. Multiple transverse structural discontinuities break the forearc into discrete structural blocks, some tectonically stable during late Holocene time but others undergoing postuplift subsidence. Understanding the paleoenvironmental settings of Tongan archaeological sites requires reconstructing the contrasting geologic histories of different forearc island clusters. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.477
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.009
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.288 · 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