MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121580371 · doi:10.1002/oa.583

Destruction of microstructure in archaeological bone: a case study from Portugal

2001· article· en· W2121580371 on OpenAlex
Mary Jackes, Richard Sherburne, David Lubell, C. P. Barker, Michael L. Wayman

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

VenueInternational Journal of Osteoarchaeology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMesolithicHuman boneArchaeologyPopulationBone formationMedicineChemistryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sampling of archaeological human bone may not be justified, contrary to former high expectations regarding adult age assessment based on histomorphometry. The alterations in buried bone as a result of bacterial action are readily visible in the scanning electron microscope (SEM). An understanding of the chemical and structural changes to cortical bone requires work at the level of a few microns. This paper reports on problems encountered during analyses of samples of human bone from Mesolithic (ca. 8000 calbp) shell midden sites at Muge in central Portugal, and the methods used to try and overcome these problems. We believe we have shown that these Mesolithic bones are partly comprised of bacterially reprecipitated mineral, which has had collagen removed, with consequent obliteration of bone microstructure. We conclude that microbial destruction of the structure of archaeological bone can be a serious impediment to analysis of the characteristics of the population represented by those skeletal remains. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.013
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.265 · 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