<scp>SEM</scp> and Stereomicroscopic Analysis of Cut Marks in Fresh and Burned Bone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study documents the prevalence of cut mark characteristics in fresh and burned domestic pig ribs. Stab wounds from single edge serrated and smooth-edged knives were inflicted in the vertebral and sternal regions of each fresh rib. Each rack of ribs was then divided into vertebral and sternal units. Vertebral units were defleshed and their associated cut marks were examined using a stereomicroscope. Sternal units were burned in an outdoor fire pit and examined with the addition of a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Linear cuts, V-shaped cross-sections, mounding, hinge fractures, and wastage were all observed on burned ribs. There was an overall decrease in the prevalence of all features (up to a 40% decrease), regardless of knife type, in burned ribs. Striations within cut marks were not observed in either fresh or burned ribs. Oblique faulting and bone lifts could only be observed using the SEM. Mounding and wastage were obliterated during the burning process. Therefore, cut marks in burned bone should ideally be examined for their characteristics utilizing an SEM.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".