MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175585199 · doi:10.3390/min11070667

Lead Isotope Analysis of Geological Native Copper: Implications for Archaeological Provenance Research in the North American Arctic and Subarctic

2021· article· en· W3175585199 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
H. K. Cooper, Antonio Simonetti

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerals · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of AlbertaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSubarctic climateArcticProvenanceCopperCircumpolar starIndigenousGeologyIsotope analysisLead (geology)IsotopeArchaeologyOceanographyGeographyEarth scienceGeochemistryEcologyChemistryPaleontologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Indigenous inhabitants of Arctic and Subarctic North America had been using native copper for several centuries prior to sustained interaction with Europeans beginning in the 18th century. The connection, if any, between the use of copper in these two adjacent regions is, at present, unclear. The ability to determine the source of native copper artifacts found in greater northwestern North America would inform on the movement of copper via trade and exchange between, and aid in understanding the innovation and diffusion of native copper metallurgy among, ancestral Dene and Inuit People. This paper provides the results of a Lead Isotope Analysis (LIA) pilot study examining Pb isotope ratios of native copper samples from multiple locations in the northern regions of North America. The results from this preliminary study indicate some overlap in Pb isotope ratios between Arctic and Subarctic sources of native copper, and these nonetheless record distinct isotope signatures relative to those associated with other North American native Cu deposits.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralsSame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207