The Rise and Fall of Complex Large Villages on the British Columbian Plateau: A Geoarchaeological Controversy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans une serie d'articles, Prentiss et al. (2003, 2005, 2007, 2008) ont propose que les grands villages et les grandes residences de la partie centrale du fleuve Fraser (en Colombie Britannique) se sont formes assez tardivement dans la prehistoire (c. 1600-800 cal B.P.) et n'ont dure que quelques siecles. Selon eux l'inegalite socioeconomique s'est developpee encore plus tard (c. 1200-800 cal B.P.). Prentiss et al. suggerent que les changements climatiques seraient a l'origine de ces evenements ainsi que de la disparition des grands villages. Nous doutons de leurs conclusions sur plusieurs plans: des methodes inappropriees pour determiner la date de ces evenements; des donnees provenant du site Keatley Creek qui indiquent un developpement de plus longue duree; des interpretations paleoclimatiques qui sont incompletes; et des contradictions au sein de leurs explications climatiques pour les changements culturels. Les preuves geochronologiques et paleoecologiques (comprenant des donnees jamais considerees auparavant) combinees aux preuves archeologiques favorisent l'interpretation du developpement des grands villages et temoignent d'une complexite socioeconomique bien anterieure a celle envisagee par Prentiss et al. (2003, 2005, 2007,2008).
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".