Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ewonus, P. A. (2017). Assessing internal household relationships and site use: Zooarchaeological evidence from Dionisio Point, Galiano Island, Canada. North American Archaeologist, 38(4), 349–393. DOI: 10.1177/0197693117727392 In this article, which was published in volume 38, issue 4 of North American Archaeologist, the following corrections have been identified by the author: Abstract, line 7: The word “consisted” should be “comprised”. Figure 2: The image file layer containing the four archaeological sites referenced in this figure has been moved to underlay the base map layer. The revised figure is provided below. Page 357, line 3: The closing parenthesis should appear after “8.0mm” in the following sentence: “Examination of their data (Grier et al., 2013: 548–550) reveals that approximately half of this difference between salmon vertebra size in their overall sample (38.1%≥8.0 mm) and successful aDNA species identification (62.7%≥8.0 mm) is due to sampling that may be non-random (of the 149 vertebrae sampled for aDNA analysis with transverse diameter values presented in Grier et al. (2013), 75 (50.3%)≥8.0 mm).” Headings appearing on pages 363, 366, and page 367 are tertiary (H3), not primary headings (H1). Page 369, final line: “Comprised” was erroneously changed to “consisted”. The correct sentence should be: “Six other units, comprised of two that contain a major hearth (144N/116E, 147N/124E), … mammal remains.” Table 2: The fish taxon row title “ Theragra chalcogramma” was moved to page 362 in the table, while the specific data for this entry remains as the final row of the table page 361. Table 3: “Carnivora”, “Cetacea”, “Rodentia”, and “Miscellaneous” should be bolded headings. Table 4: “Anseriformes” (at top) should be bolded. Table 5: “Echinoidea” (at top) should be bolded. Page 376: In the following final sentence “remain” should read “remains”: “Of the fish elements recovered, only those from an individual 5 cm level in 10 excavation units were used in the assessment of horizontal faunal distributions (NISP = 3294, NSP = 6945). Mammal (NISP = 1451) and bird (NISP = 646) remain from all levels associated with the House 1 occupation, recovered in 6.4mm screens from 12 units, were examined for horizontal patterns (Frederick, 2012).” Page 381: The heading “Departure bay” should be “Departure Bay”. Pages 381, 384: Headings “Departure Bay”, “Tsawwassen VI, VII, and VIII”, and “Site comparison” should be tertiary headings (H3). Page 387, line 7: An unnecessary comma was inserted following the word Research in this final line of the Acknowledgments section. Page 393, Author biography: Inserting “the” before “Cambridge University” and “Vancouver Island University” was in error.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.095 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.410 | 0.269 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".