MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755426460 · doi:10.1177/0197693117727392

Assessing internal household relationships and site use

2017· article· en· W2755426460 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul Ewonus

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Archaeologist · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsVancouver Island University
FundersCambridge Commonwealth TrustUniversity of CambridgeVancouver Island UniversityUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsSettlement (finance)Context (archaeology)ArchaeologyGeographySocial organizationDistribution (mathematics)ZooarchaeologyInterpretation (philosophy)GenealogyHistorySociologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zooarchaeological analysis is employed to determine the nature of social relationships within a Pacific Northwest Coast post-and-beam house dated to c. AD 200–650. Evaluation of faunal distribution patterns indicates that House 2 at the Dionisio Point site was occupied by a social group characterized by relative equality, rather than marked status differences. This provides an alternative, with a shift in emphasis, to initial interpretations. The implications include a House 2 household consisted of comparatively egalitarian, likely multi-lineage families that were members of an aggregate village. In the context of regional village settlement, these findings support the interpretation of site inhabitation focused on early spring to summer. The Dionisio Point data reflect the variation in Northwest Coast household composition. For studies of social organization within large households in other periods and places, the indication is that variability may exist but remain hidden from view until several sources of material evidence become available.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American ArchaeologistSame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207