Did Middle Stone Age Khargan Peoples Leave Structural Features? ‘Site J’, The Forgotten Settlement of the ‘Empty Desert’, Kharga Oasis, Egypt: 1933 and 2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
G. Caton-Thompson and E. W. Gardner designated new Pleistocene cultural units at Kharga Oasis in the 1930’s: both were originally termed ‘pre-Sebilian’, but were later locally named the ‘Levalloiso-Khargan’ and ‘Khargan’ industries. High on the Bulaq scarp face, a puzzling cluster of stone ‘alignments’ was discovered in 1931–32, with a reported, but discounted, association with ‘Levalloiso-Khargan’ artefacts. Gardner excavated some features in 1933. Members of the Kharga Oasis Prehistory Project relocated ‘Site J’ in January 2011, and verified the reported Khargan associations with the features. In 2008, the project found structural features associated with Khargan artefacts in the northern Gebel Yebsa survey area, confirming earlier finds in the southern oases of Kurkur and Dungul. Evidence there, and that found in Kharga and Dakhleh oases, is now designated as the Khargan Complex. The associated built stone features of the included cultural units appear to be unique in Late Pleistocene Africa, especially at Bulaq.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".