MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388918676 · doi:10.1515/opar-2022-0326

The Thule Migration: A Culture in a Hurry?

2023· article· en· W4388918676 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Archaeology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaceContext (archaeology)Radiocarbon datingHistoryArcticGeographyThe arcticArchaeologyEthnologyEcologyOceanographyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The process by which the Thule Inuit migrated from the region around Bering Strait into Arctic Canada and Greenland, which is notable for its logistical complexities, the varied and difficult regions traversed and then populated, and for the enormous distance covered, is almost invariably described in terms emphasizing the pace at which it took place. The most common description is “rapid,” and some descriptions conclude it may have been accomplished within just a few decades, despite researchers not having explored the logistical and demographic implications of that inference. This article explores several possible meanings of “rapid” in the context of the Thule migration and reviews the evidence that is informative concerning its pace, including radiocarbon dates, historical encounters, logistics, and demography. It concludes that the Thule Inuit may indeed have felt a sense of urgency to expand into new regions, but they did this at a far slower pace than most researchers have concluded, over centuries rather than decades.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.003

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.379 · 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