MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2538491593 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1612426113

Using seafaring simulations and shortest-hop trajectories to model the prehistoric colonization of Remote Oceania

2016· article· en· W2538491593 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPacific and Southeast Asian Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiological dispersalColonizationPrehistoryLand bridgeGeographyExpansiveArchaeologySettlement (finance)PeninsulaEl Niño Southern OscillationEcologyGeologyClimatologyDemographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significance The colonization of Remote Oceania between ∼3400 and 800 B.P.—from multiple origin points and across hundreds or thousands of kilometers of open ocean—represents some of the most impressive population dispersals on Earth. For decades, scholars have sought to explain when and how these occurred. Here we show that seafaring simulation techniques coupled with sophisticated analyses of climatic data, including the role of El Niño Southern Oscillation events and island distribution on ancient voyaging, are critical comparative tools for understanding the variables—culturally, technologically, and environmentally—that structured movement across the world’s largest ocean. These data also pinpoint likely departure points for ancient Pacific Islanders that in some cases support or negate current archaeological and other lines of evidence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.254 · 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