MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328946337 · doi:10.2190/na.35.4.e

The Paper Bag Theory of Basket Change on the Northwest Coast

2014· article· en· W2328946337 on OpenAlexaff
Kathryn Bernick

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Archaeologist · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal British Columbia Museum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchaeologyDiversity (politics)West coastPerspective (graphical)Selection (genetic algorithm)Variation (astronomy)HistoryGeographyGeologyComputer scienceVisual artsAnthropologyArtSociologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Archaeological baskets from the Coast Salish area of the Northwest Coast display techno-stylistic variation during the past 4,000 years. Specimens dating to Marpole times (ca. 400 B.C. to A.D. 400) have highly standardized sophisticated ornamentation. Characteristics of the ornamentation parallel those of other types of Marpole material culture, which has encouraged attempts at cognitive interpretations. Shifting perspective to consider the decorative aspect a by-product of construction paves the way for an evolutionary model of culture change. Selection for strong, reliable baskets would account for the development of Marpole basket types. The subsequent shift to plain, simply constructed baskets may represent selection for quick-to-make but less durable containers analogous to paper bags today. Similar theoretical frameworks may be applicable to other culture areas where environmental, cultural, or demographic circumstances do not explain the observed diversity.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American ArchaeologistSame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207