MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319510736 · doi:10.7183/0002-7316.75.1.117

Northernmost Precontact Maize in North America

2010· article· en· W2319510736 on OpenAlexafffund
Matt Boyd, Clarence Surette

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Antiquity · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWoodlandGeographyTemperate climateTaigaArchaeologySubarctic climateBorealPotteryAgroforestryEcologyForestryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Corn (Zea mays ssp. mays) was a key economic plant in the Americas, yet little information exists on the northern limit of maize consumption before European contact. Based on the analysis of carbonized food residue on pottery for plant microfossils (phytoliths and starch granules) from 58 precontact archaeological sites, we report the first evidence of maize consumption in the subarctic boreal forest. Recovery of maize microfossils from several widely distributed Laurel phase (Middle Woodland/Initial Shield Woodland) vessels indicates that the diffusion of corn into this region was surprisingly early (ca. A.D. 500) and may have initially spread through long-distance exchange networks linking temperate and boreal North America during the Woodland period. After A.D. 1000 maize was a widespread component of diet and was consumed by every major Late Woodland culture in the region. These results have profound implications both for the history of this cultigen and for small-scale human societies in northern North America.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 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

Citations43
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican AntiquitySame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207