Oakes Bay 1: A Preliminary Reconstruction of a Labrador Inuit Seal Hunting Economy in the Context of Climate Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geografisk Tidsskrift—Danish Journal of Geography 110(2):245–259, 2010 This paper presents results of recent archaeological research at the site of Oakes Bay 1 (HeCg-08), on Dog Island, Labrador, dated from the late 17th to late 18th century. Analyses of faunal remains provide a means of reconstructing the site's subsistence economy. The site's inhabitants practiced a very consistent mode of hunting throughout this time period, depending heavily on adult ringed seals taken on the fast ice in winter and spring. Juvenile ringed seals, taken at the ice edge in the spring were a secondary resource. A lack of evidence for the hunting of harp seals in the fall and of ringed seal pups in late spring suggests that the site had a relatively short season of occupation. The consistent pattern of hunting through time suggests that the impacts of climatic variability on Inuit subsistence in the Nain region were relatively limited, moderated by their capacity for mobility on the sea ice rather than by whole scale changes in hunting practices and species choice. The Oakes Bay 1 site presents an example of a different subsistence economy than that seen at other recently examined sites in Labrador, suggesting that the impacts of the so-called Little Ice Age were not global or uniform.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".