MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001326569 · doi:10.1080/00438243.2019.1705179

Biogeographic barriers and coastal erosion: understanding the lack of interaction between the Eastern and Western Regions of the North American Arctic

2019· article· en· W3001326569 on OpenAlexaffabout
T. Max Friesen, Michael O’Rourke

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Archaeology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsCanadian HeritageUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticGeographyBiogeographyCoastal erosionErosionEcologyArchaeologyOceanographyGeologyPaleontologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For most of the past 5,000 years, the North American Arctic has seen distinct cultural developments in its eastern and western regions, with the boundary between them located in the Amundsen Gulf region in northwestern Canada. This boundary was traversed by two major migration episodes that define the ‘big picture’ of North American Arctic archaeology, but for much of the remainder of prehistory, there are only rare indications of communication or movement across it. In this paper, we assess the reasons for this boundary, the evidence for interaction across it, and the implications for cultural developments on both sides. In order to approach these issues, we also attempt to understand the significant gaps in the archaeological record caused by the region’s severe coastal erosion, currently accelerating due to warming climates.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld ArchaeologySame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207