MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311006018 · doi:10.3390/geosciences12120440

Paleogeography of Human Settlement at Iqaluktuuq, Victoria Island, Nunavut

2022· article· en· W4311006018 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Julie M. Ross, T. Max Friesen

Bibliographic record

VenueGeosciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoGovernment of Northwest Territories
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPalaeogeographyBayGeologySubsistence agricultureArctic charRadiocarbon datingArcticSea levelOceanographyPaleontologyPhysical geographyGeographyArchaeologyFisheryTectonicsSalvelinus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Change in sea levels, be they isostatic or eustatic, impact humans and the paleogeography they inhabit. In this paper we examine paleogeography at Iqaluktuuq, a section of the Ekalluk River, Victoria Island, Nunavut, between Tahiryuaq (Ferguson Lake) and Wellington Bay. The area’s isostatic rebound impacted the Ekalluk River’s development and the use of the area by two essential subsistence resources, Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus) and caribou (Rangifer tarandus). This, in turn, impacted the choices of Pre-Dorset, Middle and Late Dorset, and Thule/Inuit people regarding site locations. A new relative sea-level curve developed using calibrated radiocarbon dates on marine shells and terrestrial material from archaeological sites is produced for Iqaluktuuq. Based on the data, large scale (1:50,000) paleogeography maps are presented for the period of human occupation of Iqaluktuuq, 3100 calibrated years Before Present (B.P. cal) to present, revealing how paleogeography impacts people’s settlement choices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeosciencesSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207