MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596736651

Analyse fonctionnelle de l’industrie lithique capsienne de Kef Zoura D: premiers résultats

2017· preprint· en· W2596736651 on OpenAlex
Bernard Gassin, Juan Francisco Gibaja

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPaleopathology and ancient diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyHumanitiesPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Use wear studies on prehistoric lithic industries, in particular of the North African Holocene, are still very scarce. The renewal of research in Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria, has allowed us to obtain new data on the function of the lithic tools of the last groups of hunters from the Epipalaeolithic, especially the Capsian, and the first groups considered as Neolithic.\nThis chapter is devoted to the functional analysis of a set of knapped lithic tools from the Typical Capsian and the Upper Capsian deposits at Kef Zoura D (KZD). This work was done as a part of the project led by Thomas Perrin (TRACES, Toulouse), MeNeMOIA: from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic in the Western Mediterranean: the African impact, in collaboration with the directors of the excavation, David Lubell and Mary Jackes (University of Waterloo, Canada).\nThis study aimed to provide information on the function of some tools characteristic of this period and to evaluate the role of these tools in the subsistence and artisanal activities of the groups who occupied the site. The preliminary results we present are based on a limited sample of the lithic industry, but these will provide a framework for our continued study in 2016 and 2017, which is possible thanks to the good condition of the material.\nThe geometrics and backed bladelets of the Typical Capsian and Upper Capsian were used as projectiles, either as points or lateral barbs, while the backed blades of the Upper Capsian were used as knives and not as projectiles. Burins show very little use wear in either the Typical Capsian or the Upper Capsian, which strengthens the hypothesis of their use as cores, but some of them were used to scrape various materials on the side of the burin. The Typical Capsian scrapers were used to work skin. The Upper Capsian notched bladelets were intentionally retouched; the notches are not a result of use and each notch is an independent active zone. They were used to scrape hard materials or organic semi-hard ones such as wood or animal bone. Some other functions and cases of recycling were also observed.\nBeyond the technical characterization of these categories of tools, our study paves the way for a renewed approach to interpret the socio-economic strategies of Capsian groups.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.280
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.083 · 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