MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293839353 · doi:10.14430/arctic4550

Lithic Technology at Linda's Point, Healy Lake, Alaska

2016· article· en· W2293839353 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Angela M. Younie, Thomas E. Gillispie

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchaeologyDebitageHearthPleistoceneExcavationGeologyProjectile pointSequence (biology)PaleosolPaleontologySubsistence agricultureGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p class="Pa5" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; color: #221e1f;">Interior Alaska’s Healy Lake archaeological locality contains a cultural sequence spanning 13 500 years, beginning with some of the oldest known human occupations in Alaska. From 2011 to 2014, we conducted archaeological excavations at the Linda’s Point site. Detailed recording has clearly separated the lowest cultural component at the site and begun to clarify the contentious culture history of the Healy Lake area. The lower component, associated with a thick paleosol, contains multiple hearths, debitage, and small triangular points similar to those seen at the Healy Lake Village site. The upper silt deposits contain a variety of lithic tool types within a dense scatter of debitage and bone fragments spanning a wide time range. Linda’s Point appears to have been used as a habitation site throughout its history, changing from recurring short-term occupations in the terminal Pleistocene to more intensive site habitation and greater reliance on local lithic resources during the Holocene.</span></p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.578
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCTICSame topicPleistocene-Era Hominins and ArchaeologyFrench-language works237,207