Archaeogeophysics and Statistical Analysis at the Buffalo Lake Metis Wintering Site (FdPe-1)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis examines differences amongst cabin features at the Buffalo Lake Métis Wintering Site (FdPe-1), a late Fur Trade-era archaeological site located in central Alberta. I discuss Métis ethnogenesis as it relates to the roving groups of Plains Métis that occupied this site, as well as how it compares to the cultural practices of those groups of Métis located in eastern Canada or in permanent settlements such as Red River. Previous archaeological research regarding the Buffalo Lake site is summarized for each of the cabins excavated, as are the artifact assemblages. I perform Exploratory Data Analyses (EDA) on these assemblages to discover patterns within the data that might provide details about the activities occurring within the cabins, and use confirmatory statistics to test the significance and probability of these patterns. I also use archaeological geophysics techniques, specifically Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR), magnetometry, and magnetic susceptibility, to determine the locations of geophysical anomalies that will assist in locating cabin features that have not yet been excavated at the site. These data then inform my conclusions on how the artifact assemblages at Buffalo Lake reflect differences in Métis conceptions of identity at the site.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it