An Energy-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis of Obsidian from Chihuahua, Montana, and Oklahoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I analyzed the sample from Chihuahua, and it matches the elemental concentrations of the Agua Fria source on the Chihuaha/Sonora border, but mahogany samples were not part of the 19 samples I analyzed for John Douglas (Shackley 2005:79-80).This is a considerable distance from Nueva Casas Grandes and to the west.It is possible that this sample represents a source that is nearly elementally identical to Agua Fria.A more precise location would be helpful.The artifacts were produced from sources throughout western North America -Oregon/Nevada, Idaho, and New Mexico (Table 1).Craig Skinner aided in identifying the Oregon/Nevada and Idaho source provenance since they are not published.Idaho sources have been seen in Oklahoma.As far as I know, the Double H/Whitehorse source may be more typical in prehistoric contexts in Montana.Analysis of the USGS RGM-1 standard indicates high machine precision for the elements of interest (Table 1 here).
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".