MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2138494019 · doi:10.7202/1015959ar

Walrus Island – A pivotal place for High Arctic Palaeo-Eskimo societies in Northeast Greenland

2013· article· en· W2138494019 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mikkel Sørensen

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes/Inuit/Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação
KeywordsArcticShoreArchaeologyGeographyThe arcticGeologyPhysical geographyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the Palaeo-Eskimo ruin features of the Walrus Island site are presented and analysed. The Walrus Island site was investigated in 2008 and more than 2,000 stone features were recorded, of which 445 were the remains of dwellings attributed to Palaeo-Eskimo occupations. These ruins are described as “mid-passages,” “tent rings,” “clearings,” and “pavements.” They are associated with lithic artefacts that attest to the presence of all the previously identified Palaeo-Eskimo cultures of Northeast Greenland, i.e., Independence I, Saqqaq, and Greenlandic Dorset. Based on the ruins’ location near sloping terrain and lack of peripheral stones, it is argued that the Greenlandic Dorset people built snow houses on the site. Walrus Island has the second largest known Palaeo-Eskimo site in Northeast Greenland, the largest one being the Kap Skt. Jacques site on the island Île-de-France, which has 548 features. Both sites, and four other large or potentially very large sites, have in common a shore location on the Northeast Greenland coast near polynyas. These large sites were of pivotal importance for the Palaeo-Eskimos of Northeast Greenland and may help us understand their way of life in the extreme High Arctic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes/Inuit/Studies→Same topicIndigenous Studies and Ecology→French-language works237,207→