MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792164365 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-22059-5

A New Pleistocene Hominin Tracksite from the Cape South Coast, South Africa

2018· article· en· W2792164365 on OpenAlexaff
Charles Helm, Richard T. McCrea, Hayley C. Cawthra, Martin G. Lockley, Richard M. Cowling, Curtis W. Marean, Guy H.H. Thesen, Tammy S. Pigeon, Sinèad Hattingh

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Canadian institutionsPeace Arch Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPleistoceneCaveHomo sapiensHominidaeGeologyShorePaleontologyCapeEarly PleistocenePeninsulaArchaeologyGeographyOceanographyBiological evolutionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Late Pleistocene hominin tracksite has been identified in coastal aeolianite rocks on the Cape south coast of South Africa, an area of great significance for the emergence of modern humans. The tracks are in the form of natural casts and occur on the ceiling and side walls of a ten-metre long cave. Preservation of tracks is of variable quality. Up to forty hominin tracks are evident. Up to thirty-five hominin tracks occur on a single bedding plane, with potential for the exposure of further tracks. Five tracks are apparent on a second hominin track-bearing bedding plane. A number of individuals made the tracks while moving down a dune surface. A geological investigation at the site and stratigraphic comparison to published geochronological studies from this area suggest that the tracks are ~90 ka in age. If this is the case, the shoreline at the time would have been approximately 2 km distant. This is the first reported hominin tracksite from this time period. It adds to the relatively sparse global record of early hominin tracks, and represents the largest and best preserved archive of Late Pleistocene hominin tracks found to date. The tracks were probably made by Homo sapiens.

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)0.001
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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations57
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicPleistocene-Era Hominins and ArchaeologyFrench-language works237,207