MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159494144

The Osteological Paradox

2020· article· en· W3159494144 on OpenAlexaffabout
Josalyne Head

Bibliographic record

VenueStudent Research Proceedings · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteologyNavyPaleopathologyArchaeologyMedicineHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the summer 2019 field season, ten human skeletons were excavated from the ongoing project (PAH-178) at the Hospital Hill Royal Navy Cemetery that was operational between the years of 1793-1822 on the island of Antigua, near English Harbour. As a student of Dr. Treena Swanston, a professor of MacEwan University, and one of the researchers invested in the project, I was hired as a research assistant and excavating archaeologist to assist with analyzing the skeletal remains excavated from a burial site associated with the Royal Navy Hospital for evidence of pathological changes. In studying disease on skeletal remains, paleopathologists look for evidence of skeletal changes or lesions associated with pathological conditions. In order for skeletal changes to occur, an individual must live with a disease or illness for an extended period of time, meaning those who succumb quickly will typically not show any skeletal evidence of bony changes or pathologies. This is known as the osteological paradox. However, we did not find any evidence of pathological changes at site PAH-178 during the 2019 field season. Presented in absentia on April 27, 2020 at Student Research Day at MacEwan University in Edmonton, Alberta. (Conference cancelled) Faculty Mentor: Treena Swanston Department: Anthropology

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.033
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.332
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.092 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudent Research ProceedingsSame topicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207