Le site de Fejej FJ-1. Cadre de vie et comportement des hominidés.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hominid behaviour at the fejej site FJ-1. In level C1 from the Fejej site FJ-1, the good presevation of the archeological and palaeontological material, the rapid burial and the fact that the objects remained in situ, the refits of lithic artefacts and faunal objects, evidence of anthropic fractures and the absence of other carnivore intervention, indicate the exceptional deposition conditions of this site, which brings so much rare and precious information on hominid behaviour almost two million years ago. The hominids were installed on a fluviale sand ridge, coarse and loose, bordered by a dislevelment 50 cm high, near a riverbank, during a low water level periodend at the heart of a floodplain. The presence of abundant and divese game, not fat from lithic raw materials (pebbles) necessary for manufacturing stone tools for carcass processing, well-drained ground on a sand ridge beside a river, must have been decisive factors in the choice of the site. The association of knapped lithics in situ and large mammal bones, from various species, fractured on site, attest to the installation of a base camp on stable ground, where members of the group could carry out the activities necessary for daily life.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".