A Morphometric Approach to Assessing Late Paleoindian Projectile Point Variability on the Southern High Plains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Late Paleoindian typology on the southern High Plains has suffered from overlapping definitions and subjectivity in assigning individual projectile points to types. To address perceived projectile point variability in the region, assemblages from several localities on the southern High Plains are examined for statistical differences in shape. Digital photographs of projectile points are used to digitize point outlines. Landmark coordinate data then are used to delineate 10 interlandmark characters. Multivariate analysis of projectile points from eight assemblages reveals that the primary difference in point shape lies between long points with narrow bases and short points with wide bases. Analysis of characters by raw material type or source discerned no significant differences. Variation in point form represented by most of the assemblages, including the Plainview and Milnesand type assemblages, overlaps to a significant degree. The Lubbock Lake FA5-17 assemblage, consisting of long points with narrow bases, appears most distinct in terms of shape and raw material selection indicating the contemporaneity of different point forms and perhaps technological traditions in the region by approximately 10,000 years ago.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".