Obsidian Studies and the Archaeology of 19th-Century California
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractAbstractObsidian studies play an integral part in archaeology around the world, particularly in the Americas, but few archaeologists have employed obsidian studies to understand Native American life at historical archaeological sites. Yet, obsidian sourcing and hydration analysis can provide critical insights into site chronology and use, lithic recycling, and procurement and trade at contact and colonial sites. Obsidian geochemical sourcing and hydration analyses of a 19th-century rancho site in northern California have revealed new information on Native Americans who labored there in the second quarter of the 19th century. The obsidian data indicate a significant amount of lithic manufacture and use, a change in obsidian procurement in the 1800s, and an unprecedented number of obsidian sources represented on-site. The implications for general obsidian studies, as well as for regional archaeological issues, concern the problems with popular sourcing methods in northern California and the need to revisit current understandings of the first micron of hydration rim development.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it