Morphological and Biometric Study of the Bones of the Buccal Apparatus of Some Nova Scotia Fishes of Archaeological Interest (Curatorial Report #96)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present report describes the results of the work carried out thanks to a N. S. Museum Grant (1998-1999). This pilot work, although incomplete, will fill a gap in Nova Scotia faunal studies since, there is not yet an organized reference collection of fish bones available to zooarchaeologists in the area nor a systematic description of the osteology of Nova Scotia fishes. The general purpose specified in the title can be divided in this report into the three following objectives: 1. Preparation of a reference collection of disarticulated fish skeletons of commercial size for the use of zooarchaeologists interested in fish remains. 2. Calculation of regression equations, to estimate the size (length or weight) of the live fish with selected bone dimensions. 3. Preparation of drawings and plates to identify the bones and dichotornic tables for the rapid identification of the species to which the bones belong. _____________________________________________________________________ Please note: This resource is presented as originally published. The content of older reports may not reflect the current state of knowledge on the topic documented. Please be aware of this when using this resource.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".