Marra Wonga: Archaeological and contemporary First Nations interpretations of one of central Queensland’s largest rock art sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A large sandstone rock art site, Marra Wonga, near Barcaldine, central Queensland, is the focus of this paper. This 160-metre-long rock shelter is estimated to have over 15,000 petroglyphs, which are mostly animal tracks, lines, grooves and drilled holes, as well as 111 hand-related and object stencils. There is also a cluster of human-shaped foot petroglyphs on the floor of the shelter, some with six or more toes. Unique compositions on the shelter wall include seven large, engraved star-like designs with central engraved pits and large, engraved snake-like designs running across and through other petroglyphs. We describe and discuss some of the features of Marra Wonga from archaeological (etic) and ethnographic (emic) perspectives, especially in terms of the significance of a petroglyph of an anthropomorph, seven star-like designs seemingly made as part of a composition, the large snake-like designs, and six-toed human feet. Today, Marra Wonga is a teaching site used to tell important cultural stories that are connected to many other places through the imagery and Dreaming Tracks, as well as a tourist destination managed by the Yambangku Aboriginal Cultural Heritage and Tourism Development Aboriginal Corporation (YACHATDAC), with whom we partnered for this research.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".