MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146961771 · doi:10.1353/arc.2011.0103

Chronology, Culture, and Climate: A Radiometric Re-evaluation of Late Prehistoric Occupations at Cape Denbigh, Alaska

2003· article· en· W2146961771 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. S. Murray, A. C. Robertson, Roberto Ferrara

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Anthropology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrehistoryChronologyCapeArchaeologyRadiometric datingGeographyHistoryRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents new data about the chronological placement of two archaeological sites at Cape Denbigh, Norton Sound, Alaska and others along the Kobuk River, Alaska.Direct radiometric dates on arrowpoints and harpoon heads indicate that selected type specimens are not always reliable temporal indicators for late prehistoric sequences in northwest Alaska and Arctic Canada.In the future new fieldwork and direct dating of artifacts and associated sediments will be necessary in order to refine culture-history sequences, evaluate the utility of artifact types as chronological indicators, and to examine the relationship between past culture change and environmental change in coastal Alaska. The Kobuk River Sequence and the Arctic Woodland CultureIn 1952 J. Louis Giddings published the results of his 1941 and 1947 archaeological and dendrochronological investigations along the Kobuk River (see Nash 2000 for a summary).Although he located over 24 archaeological sites, and reported

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations16
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic AnthropologySame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207