Understanding Cache Variability: A Deliberately Burned Early Paleoindian Tool Assemblage from the Crowfield Site, Southwestern Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Crowfield site, excavated in 1981–82, would be a small typical Early Paleoindian campsite except for the added presence of a plough-truncated pit feature containing 182+ burned and destroyed stone artifacts. This paper reports on the latest insights into the feature contents based on continuing attempts to cross-mend fragments, as well as detailed analyses of the spatial distribution of artifact pieces within the feature itself. These results reinforce earlier conclusions that the items were burned where found, represent a cache of still functional tools and preforms, and were purposefully destroyed. They confirm that the site represents the best evidence to date for sacred ritual by eastern North American fluted point users. Contrasts with other reported early sacred and secular caches are documented that highlight the uniqueness of the assemblage. It is argued that these contrasts indicate the Crowfield feature assemblage more closely approximates a transported, functioning tool kit, as opposed to the surplus, seasonal and insurance gear, or offerings, that dominate other early caches.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".