Redating of the To’aga site (Ofu Island, Manu’a) and a revised chronology for the Lapita to Polynesian Plainware transition in Tonga and Samoa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Radiocarbon dating Pacific archaeological sites is fraught with difficulties. Often situated in coastal beach ridges or sand dunes, sites exhibit horizontal and vertical disturbances, while datable materials such as wood charcoal are typically highly degraded, or derived from old trees or drift wood and bone collagen rarely survives in the tropical conditions. Shell, therefore, is the most logical material for dating Pacific sites since it is resistant to alteration, can be sampled to ensure only the last few seasons of growth are represented and is often closely tied to human economic activities. However, shell radiocarbon ( 14 C) dating has been plagued by interpretive problems largely due to our limited knowledge of the 14 C cycle in near shore marine and estuarine environments. Consequently, shell dates are typically ignored in regional chronometric evaluations and often avoided for dating altogether. Recent advances in our understanding of the source of shell 14 C content as well as the development of the first South Pacific Gyre model of changing marine 14 C over time, combined with Bayesian statistical modelling, have now provided us with insight into the value of these shell radiocarbon dates, enabling a revision of the age of the To’aga site on Ofu Island, an early occupation site associated with the initial Polynesian Plainware period in Samoa, the earliest use of which is now dated to between 2782 and 2667 cal BP.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".