The mineralogy and structure of use-wear polish on chert
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polished edges of archaeological stone tools are commonly investigated to obtain information on the tools' uses in prehistory. Yet to this day, it remains unclear what exactly such polishes are and how they form. Answering these questions should allow the elaboration of new interpretative methods based on objective measurements. Two major competing hypotheses of polish formation have been proposed: abrasion and the formation of a thin amorphous film on the chert or flint surface. We employ reflectance infrared spectroscopy, a technique particularly sensitive to thin amorphous films, to investigate these two hypotheses. We found no added amorphous layer that would have formed upon friction against bone, antler, ivory or wood. Our observations suggest polish formation by abrasion, notwithstanding previous claims of added amorphous surface structures. This has implications for our understanding of the physical processes taking place during friction of chert and flint against different materials. Our results also open the possibility to propose new pathways for identifying different use-wear processes, based on the degree of abrasion.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it