MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389526110 · doi:10.1080/20555563.2023.2285565

Chindadn Bifaces and the Archaeology of Terminal-Pleistocene Alaska

2023· article· en· W4389526110 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Angela M. Younie, Ted Goebel, Evelynn Combs

Bibliographic record

VenuePaleoAmerica · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation of Sri LankaSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaWenner-Gren Foundation
KeywordsProjectile pointArchaeologyLithic technologyDebitagePleistoceneStone toolHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chindadn bifaces are one of the few diagnostic lithic hallmarks of the terminal Pleistocene in interior Alaska. This paper presents the first regional overview and quantitative technological analysis of bifaces from archaeological sites dating 11,400 calendar years ago and earlier, based on characteristics of reduction, shaping, use, and discard. Overall, finished bifaces are small and extremely thin, with evidence of expedient production and use. Four basal-shape groups are present, falling semi-consistently into four descriptions. Convex-based bifaces appear as a distinct group with teardrop outline, informal reduction techniques, and minimal evidence for utilization. Triangular and subtriangular bifaces, exhibiting diverse reduction characteristics and low rates of hafting wear and breakage, appear to be more generalized point tips designed to conserve raw materials in Beringian climates. Concave-based bifaces show intensive flaking and high rates of haft-element breakage and abrasion, indicating they do not fit within a strict definition of Chindadn biface technology.

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 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
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaleoAmericaSame topicPleistocene-Era Hominins and ArchaeologyFrench-language works237,207