Two Cultures—One Environment: Vickers Focus Adaptations Contrasted with Blackduck Adaptations in the Tiger Hills
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The historical roots and attendant technologies of two woodland-based cultures are examined in the context of the Tiger Hills upland in southwestern Manitoba. High levels of ecological complexity, relative to the surrounding prairies, characterize the Tiger Hills where the mosaic of glacial moraine deposits, wetlands and otholes, outwash silt-plain and meadowland, has created a complex of microhabitats. These range from cattail marsh to open grassland to willow thickets and closed forest canopy. Such areas of local biodiversity provide a wide range of possibilities for hunter-gatherer and forager-horticulturist societies. Two groups, Vickers focus and Blackduck, are contrasted on the basis of settlement patterns and subsistence strategies. Two sites in particular, Lowton and Hokanson, separated by less than a kilometer in space and approximately 500 years in time, are examined in the larger settlement context of these groups and their subsistence strategies. The markedly different lifeways of these people who opera ted within the same environmental parameters can be attributed to their historical backgrounds and their willingness to adopt/discover the new and necessary technologies and cultural lore required to maximize their success in exploiting new opportunities in the Tiger Hills.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| 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 it