The Big Bar Lake Burial : Middle Period Human Remains from the Canadian Plateau
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Collaboration between anthro- pologists and the Canoe Creek and High Bar First Nations resulted in the excavation and identification of a radiocarbon-dated 5,000- year-old human burial, one of only six Middle Period burials now known from three Cana- dian Plateau sites. The burial appears to have been an isolated mortuary occurrence but with a pattern of body disposition similar to China Lake (EiRm-7) and Pritchard (EeQw- 21). Osteological analysis indicated an elderly female (sex confirmed by molecular testing) with age-related pathological changes. A comprehensive comparative review of known Canadian Plateau human remains, included in this study, revealed an individual of rela- tively short stature with strongly developed upper limbs. Stable isotope analysis (carbon and nitrogen) pointed to a predominantly terrestrial diet likely based on hunting, with a moderate intake of marine protein, presuma- bly salmon. Testing for mitochondrial DNA indicated haplogroup A, which is widespread in living Native Americans. Comparative mtDNA data suggest long-standing genetic continuity in the Pacific Northwest, but with evidence for a genetically diverse population in existence at 5000 BP. Resume. Une collaboration entre les anthro- pologues et les Premieres nations de Canoe Creek et de High Bar a permis la fouille et l'identification de restes humains datant d'il y a 5000 ans (datation au carbone-14). Il s'agit de l'un des six humains inhumes au cours de la periode moyenne decouverts a ce jour dans trois sites du plateau canadien. L'inhumation semble avoir ete un rite funeraire isole mais la disposition du corps est similaire a celle des
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".