Landscapes shared by visibility: a case study on the settlement relationships of the Songgukri culture, Korea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Songgukri culture (c. 2900–2400 cal. BP) in the Geum River basin is often regarded as one of the earliest complex societies in the Korean peninsula, based on some evidence for an intensified agrarian economy and social differentiation. This study focuses on landscape visibility as a method of detecting settlement relationships of the Songgukri culture. Two measures of landscape visibility, viewshed size and shared-ness of viewshed (SoV), are examined in this study. Our results indicate that while Songgukri centers tend to have larger visibility of landscape than non-centers, both centers and non-centers share their visible landscape with other settlements at a remarkably high rate. We argue that landscape visibility at Songgukri settlements reflects a shared sense of cultural belonging among settlers, rather than sociopolitical inequality between the elites in centers and the non-elites in other settlements. This study highlights a long-term process, in which bottom-up cultural interactions of Songgukri residents may have contributed to the development of settlement organization and regional communal identities over time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".