Taphonomic Changes to Blunt Force Trauma: A Preliminary Study<sup>*</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the effects of taphonomic processes on blunt force trauma (BFT) through an experimental study involving pig heads. Of particular concern is the possibility that taphonomic changes can create pseudo-trauma and/or conceal evidence of actual trauma. BFT was inflicted on 10 pig skulls using a hammer. The skulls were subsequently exposed to the environment for 12 months. Seven taphonomic changes were evaluated: the freeze-thaw cycle; rodent gnawing; carnivore scavenging; presence/weight of soil; presence/weight of rain and snow; movement/displacement of bones; and discoloration due to sun bleaching and grass staining. Taphonomic effects varied between cancellous, compact, fresh, and degreased bone. Freezing and thawing, exposure to rain and snow, movement of the skulls, and soil erosion altered and, in some cases disguised, pre-existing trauma. Rodent and carnivore activity did not obliterate evidence of BFT. Recommendations for evaluating BFT on remains affected by taphonomic processes are presented. As each taphonomic process outlined by this study has the potential to disguise antemortem injury, the authors propose that one must carefully examine large, circular openings in the skull that may represent the remnant evidence of BFT.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".