MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791381505

Stable isotope evidence for Amerindian subsistence in Newfoundland, 2800 B.C. to A.D. 1829

2016· dissertation· en· W2791381505 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Alison Harris

Bibliographic record

VenueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of California, Irvine
KeywordsSubsistence agricultureArchaeologyGeographyIsotope analysisStable isotope ratioBiosocial theoryδ15NRadiocarbon datingMarine conservationδ13CEcologyBiologyAgriculture
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Archaeological research has informed on the lifeways of Newfoundland’s past Amerindian populations, but their subsistence practices are still poorly understood, particular with respect to the roles played by marine and terrestrial resources. To investigate Amerindian diet, isotope ratios (δ¹³Ccoll, δ¹⁵Ncoll) were measured in 86 skeletons from the Maritime Archaic site of Port au Choix-3 (4500 – 4000 cal B.P.), and in 29 skeletons from 12 Recent Indian/Beothuk sites (AD 1000 – 1800). Whole dietary carbon was estimated by measuring carbon isotopes in the enamel of 12 Beothuk skeletons. The Maritime Archaic sample was characterized by the presence of at least two subsistence patterns: one marine-based, and the other mixed marine-terrestrial. These patterns may relate to geographic origin, or to biosocial categories. Recent Indian/Beothuk diet was revealed to be predominantly mixed marine-terrestrial in origin, but characterized by increasing amounts of terrestrial foods in the late historic period.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)Same topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207