Practice Makes Projectiles: Genesse Biface Technology in Southern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study I investigate the lithic technology practice communities of what is now southwestern Ontario between 3800 and 3400 B.P., the latter part of the period dubbed “the Broad Point Archaic.” I seek to propose historical processes by which Genesee bifaces might have entered Ontario, and how they were used by past First Nations peoples. I observe both the form (using qualitative and metric traits) and use-wear (using macroscopic diagnostic impact fractures) of Genesee bifaces from seven sites located in southwestern Ontario: Davidson, Sadler, Desjardins, Parkhill, Brodie, R&K, and Hamilton Golf Course. The evidence suggests Genesee bifaces were used as projectiles throughout the region. Additionally, it appears that the communities in the Ausable and Komoka drainages altered their technological system (Adder Orchard) in order to adopt aspects of Genesee technology. The spread, and use, of broad-bladed bifaces in the region is now more well-understood.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".