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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nearly a quarter century has passed since Smith’s (1990) seminal volume <italic>The Mississippian Emergence</italic> was published. That volume, through a set of collected works, was the first to attempt a region-wide synthesis of what was known and thought about Mississippian origins. This introductory chapter contextualizes the work of the contributing authors in several ways. We begin by defining some key terms used throughout the chapters and volume, and then we examine the history of grand theory and paradigmatic shifts in the study of Mississippian origins to illuminate the routes that led to today’s thinking. This section includes an assessment of the current status of social theory in Mississippian studies. Special emphasis is placed on a discussion of cultural entanglements, a topic common to most of the contributions and that addresses the ways in which the various regional traditions that archaeologists recognize as Mississippian were negotiated. The final section considers the broad sweep of Mississippianization and its impacts on later developments across the Eastern Woodlands.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 it