Deliberate selection of rocks in the construction of the Gummingurru Stone Arrangement Site Complex, Darling Downs, Queensland
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 paper uses statistical analyses to examine the hypothesis that the creators of the Gummingurru Stone Arrangement Site Complex, southeast Queensland, deliberately selected rocks, based on size and shape, for the production of motifs at the site. As Gummingurru is an Aboriginal site, the literature that frames the research concerns Aboriginal cultural Law and worldviews. However, because the data are archaeological measurements, quantitative statistical methods are also employed. These quantitative results demonstrate deliberate selection of rocks occurred in the construction of four of the motifs at Gummingurru. We conclude that there are archaeological signatures of human behaviour in response to the requirements of cultural Laws with respect to the choice of raw materials, at least in stone arrangement sites.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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