MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149656147 · doi:10.1002/oa.748

Identification of historical human skeletal remains: a case study using skeletal and dental age, history and DNA

2004· article· en· W2149656147 on OpenAlexafffundabout
M. Anne Katzenberg, Gerald A. Oetelaar, J. Oetelaar, Charles FitzGerald, Dongya Yang, Shelley R. Saunders

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Osteoarchaeology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Calgary
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMcMaster University
KeywordsDeciduous teethAncient DNAArchaeologyCoffinPaleopathologyHistoryGeographyGenealogyDentistryDemographyMedicineSociologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Excavation of an early historical (circa 1900) church cemetery in Cochrane, Alberta, Canada, revealed the graves of six individuals. All but one had been previously excavated and the individuals were re‐interred elsewhere. The remaining grave contained a coffin burial of an infant including most of the skeleton, crowns of forming deciduous teeth, scalp and hair. The remains were excavated and historical research was carried out to determine possible families who had used the cemetery. Skeletal and dental age estimates pointed to a particular individual described in historical records. This identification was confirmed through more precise ageing by dental microstructure, sex determination using DNA, and finally, maternal relatedness by comparison of mtDNA with a living female relative. In addition to describing the analytical methods used, this paper demonstrates the importance of accurately identifying historical burials, particularly when living relatives remain in the community. Copyright © 2004 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.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations27
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of OsteoarchaeologySame topicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207