MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208954290

Environmental and Hunter-Gatherer Responses to the White River Ash East Volcanic Eruption in the Late Holocene Canadian Subarctic

2020· article· en· W3208954290 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Todd J. Kristensen, Alwynne B. Beaudoin, John W. Ives

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubarctic climateHunter-gathererVolcanic ashHoloceneTephraArcticEcologyGeologyPaleoecologyVolcanoArchaeologySubsistence agricultureGeographyOceanographyPaleontology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The eastern lobe of the Alaskan White River Ash volcanic event of AD 846 – 848 blanketed portions of Yukon and Northwest Territories, Canada, in 5 to 50 cm of tephra. The eruption has been linked to concurrent changes among hunter- gatherers, including the spread of new technologies and the continent-wide migration of a group of Dene ancestors from Subarctic Canada to the United States. We use published palaeoenvironmental data (primarily pollen and charcoal profiles) as well as studies of modern ash fall ecology and human health hazards associated with eruptions to reconstruct effects of the White River Ash east event on northern hunter-gatherer subsistence. While many components of local ecosystems appear to have rebounded quickly from ash deposition, we deduce a more pronounced impact on the important game species of caribou and salmon, the seasonal migration paths of which were intersected by thick deposits of ash. A trophic model informed by palaeoenvironmental data and ethnohistoric records suggests that negative biological effects of the ash temporarily pushed hunter-gatherer populations to neighbouring and less affected kin groups for up to 100 years. This synthesis contextualises archaeological theories of human responses to ecological disturbance events in circumpolar landscapes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.260 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCTICSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207