Neolithic of the Northeast Asia and the Arctic Small Tool Tradition of the North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The origins of several northern cultures — Native peoples of the Arctic and Subarctic (Inuits, Chukchi, Koryaks, Aleuts) are associated by most researchers with the development and spread of Neolithic cultures in Northeast Asia. These Neolithic cultures later gave rise to the Arctic Small Tool Tradition (ASTt) in Alaska, Canada, and Greenland. Neolithic cultures of Arctic and Subarctic Northeast Siberia (Yakutia, Chukotka and Kolyma regions) began their development during Mid-Holocene, approximately 6500–5500 years ago. Their basis are the Neolithic cultures of the Baikal Lake region, but as they formed they gained a unique character. Thus, in Yakutia, we can distinguish Syalakh, Belkachi, and Ymiyakhakh cultures, which later developed into the Neolithic cultures of Kolyma and Chukotka (Upper Kolyma, Ust-Belskaya, and Northern Chukotka). During the Neolithic, microblade technology continues to be used, and new shapes of bifacially flaked tools appear, which find analogies in the ASTt toolkits of the Arctic and Subarctic Zone of North America. In the Kolyma and Chukotka Neolithic complexes and in the ASTt complex in Alaska and Canada we find common tool types: small triangular points, rounded dorsally and ventrally retouched scrapers, beak-shaped combined tools, angular and multifaceted burins, end and side inset blades, gravers and adze with partially polished blades etc. Common traits of these cultures (traditions) formed, it appears, not only due to the direct spread of the Neolithic technologies and people into Alaska, but also due to the commonalities in the environmental and climatic zones of the Arctic and Subarctic which housed these cultures from the beginning of the second half of the Holocene.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".