MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197263445 · doi:10.2307/3557564

Comments on the Mainland Origins of the Preceramic Cultures of the Greater Antilles

2003· article· en· W3197263445 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLatin American Antiquity · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPacific and Southeast Asian Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainlandColonizationGeographyCaribbean islandCaribbean regionArchaeologyEcologyLatin AmericansBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Computer simulations are used to shed light on the probable origins of the earliest Preceramic cultures of the Greater Antilles and to understand the navigation skills necessary for island colonization. These cultures, dating to between ca. 4000 B.C. and 2000 B.C., are found on Cuba, Hispaniola, and possibly Puerto Rico. Two areas, northern South America and northern Central America, have assemblages that bear resemblance to the assemblages of the Greater Antilles, but there are important differences. Chance discovery of the Greater Antilles is possible from three areas: northern South America, northern Central America, and southern Florida. Directed voyages have a high degree of success from all three areas. However, voyages from northern South America require the least navigational skill, making it the most likely source of colonization. From northern Central America, foreknowledge of the islands appears to be required, while directed voyages from southern Florida encounter considerable risk.

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 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 score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.771

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.281 · 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