Coastal archaeological site visibility problems and underwater prospects in the Northern Lake Superior Basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The early to middle Holocene was marked by considerable variability in lake levels in the Lake Superior Basin due to a combination of meltwater runoff, isostatic adjustment, shifting glacial margins, and climate change. These processes likely had a large impact on the preservation and visibility of coastal archaeological sites dating from the Early Period (Paleoindian) to the Middle Period (Shield Archaic). Of particular interest is the brief interval after 9300 cal. B.P. when ancestral Lake Superior dropped to its lowest level (Houghton) and human populations may have made incursions deeper into the basin. Elsewhere in the Upper Great Lakes, this period is associated with offshore archaeological sites submerged by rising water levels later in the Holocene. New geological data from the Thunder Bay, ON, region yield exceptional insight into the paleohydrology of the Houghton phase and, hence, the underwater archaeological prospects of this low water phase in the northern Lake Superior Basin. These data indicate that the lake reached its lowest level by at least ~9100 cal. B.P. but was highly unstable, at least initially, due to a combination of climate and meltwater runoff. Early underwater sites may be confined to two short, hydrologically closed, lowstands between ~9100 and 8700 cal. B.P. and would have been impacted by at least one lake transgression. Such sites, however, may still hold better potential for organic preservation and the visibility of large cultural features compared to their terrestrial counterparts. Coastal sites occupied when the lake was hydrologically closed may be especially well‐preserved due to rapid inundation before the gradual, and generally erosional, Nipissing transgression occurred.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".