MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613808616 · doi:10.17491/jgsi/2002/590603

Toranagallu Mound: Provenance of Unusual Glassy Materials

2002· article· en· W2613808616 on OpenAlexaff
L. A. Pavlish, Graham C. Wilson, R. Nijagunappa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Geological Society of India · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Materials Analysis
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProvenanceMineralogyNeutron activation analysisGeologyPlateau (mathematics)MicroanalysisHomogeneousElectron probe microanalysisGeochemistryElectron microprobeChemistryRadiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Slag-like material from a mound of uncertain origin near the town of Toranagallu in the Bellary District of Karnataka, was analysed with the purpose of determining its origin. The material exemplifies ‘ash mounds’ of Neolithic age, which are abundant in the Deccan plateau and surrounding areas of Peninsular India. The material is porous and glassy, with abundant diopside crystallites in a rather homogeneous glassy matrix. Bulk analyses by instrumental neutron activation analysis (INAA), XRF and ICP-based methods, including ICPMS of REE, plus in situ electron-probe microanalysis (EPM) of the glass and crystallites provide chemical and mineralogical constraints on possible origins. The analytical results suggest that the sample may represent residue from a glass-making operation. This result defines one use of the mound, but leaves open the possibility that a range of other activities may have contributed to the mound’s development over a protracted time span.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Geological Society of IndiaSame topicCultural Heritage Materials AnalysisFrench-language works237,207