MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W26456644 · doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2015.10.001

A comprehensive analysis of the butchering activities performed at the Fincastle Bison Kill Site (D1Ox-5)

2008· dissertation· en· W26456644 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Angela Watts

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical and Biophysical Research Communications · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyUniversity of Lethbridge
KeywordsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Fincastle site (DlOx-5) is located in Southern Alberta, Canada. Excavations from 2004-2007 unearthed a significant number of lithic artefacts, fire-broken rock and a dense bone bed. Radiocarbon dates (ca. 2500 BP) place the single occupancy kill site in the Late Middle Prehistoric Period. This thesis investigates the butchering activities that took place in the East Block of the site, where 60,000 bone fragments were collected. Of these faunal remains, 5,540 records were processed and examined using Brumley’s (1991) Bone Unit (BU) analysis scheme. They were then assigned to a Bone Unit Butchering Category, a classification system created to identify specific butchering activities. Detailed analyses of the articulations, location and quantity of impact and/or cut marks, and specific fracture types and lengths were also carried out. The evidence shows that both primary and secondary butchering operations occurred at Fincastle, including joint dismemberment, meat removal, marrow extraction and grease rendering processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical and Biophysical Research Communications→Same topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies→French-language works237,207→