MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2885597253 · doi:10.71781/7195

2000 ans d’occupation préhistorique sur l’Ile Verte : les traditions céramiques, l’organisation de la technologie lithique et les réseaux d’interactions au Sylvicole moyen

2016· dissertation· fr· W2885597253 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Étienne Mailhot

Bibliographic record

VenuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au Sylvicole supérieur récent (1300 ap. J.-C. à 1534 ap. J.-C.), l’Ile Verte était fréquentée par les Iroquoiens du Saint-Laurent habitant dans la région de Québec qui, dans le cadre d’une stratégie de transhumance, venaient y chasser le phoque. Pour ce qui est des périodes antérieures, le Sylvicole moyen ancien (400 av. J.-C. à 500 ap. J.-C.) et le Sylvicole moyen tardif (500 ap. J.-C. à 1000 ap J.-C.), nous en savons encore très peu; qui étaient ces groupes qui chassaient le phoque sur l’Ile Verte pendant ces périodes? Le site Turcotte-Lévesque nous offre une opportunité d’étudier près de 2000 ans de chasse aux mammifères marins sur l’ile et d’y documenter les épisodes du Sylvicole moyen. Dans le cadre de ce mémoire, nous nous intéresserons principalement aux réseaux d’interactions ainsi qu’aux schèmes d’établissement qui prédominaient dans cette région par l’étude des vestiges en céramique ainsi que par l’organisation de la technologie lithique de ces populations. Finalement, nous tenterons de répondre à une grande question; est-ce que ce sont les ancêtres des Iroquoiens du Saint-Laurent qui occupaient l’Ile Verte au Sylvicole moyen ou des groupes culturellement distincts?

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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal)→Same topicPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology→French-language works237,207→