MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Cobble Stone Mining Tools - Evidence of Their Use in the Bronze Age Mines of Britain and in Current Archaeological Experiments Investigating Ancient Mining and the Processing of Metal Ores

2023· article· en· W4390050232 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Timberlake

Bibliographic record

VenueMETALLA · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsArthur B. McDonald-Canadian Astroparticle Physics Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCobbleArchaeologyScraper siteGeologyExcavationHaulageKnappingStone toolPlacer miningMining engineeringBronzeBronze AgeGeographyGeochemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The characteristic artefacts of Early Bronze Age metal ore mining are cobble stone mining tools. The current study suggests that within these tool assemblages it is normal to see some sort of use specialisation and opportunistic re-use of broken tools, whilst the wear pattern and modification to these suggests the creation of ad hoc tool kits, and the use of both hand-held and hafted hammers. At some of the sites more than 90 % of cobbles used show only minor evidence for purposeful modification (such as a pecked groove designed for hafting), yet extensive experimentation has demonstrated that many of these tools could have been, and probably were used with handles. Some sort of discrimination in the collection of cobbles at source is suggested by the evidence for consistency in size, shape, weight and lithology of the stones. In West Wales we find suitable cobbles brought up to 25 km inland from the storm beaches on the coast to be used at these upland sites. Experimental archaeology has been successful in predicting the types of tools to be found during the archaeological excavation of sites; this includes the use of antler picks and bone scrapers and chisels which often don’t survive within acidic mining environments. As regards stone tools, experiments have also shown how the most rudimentary artefacts might be used in the processing and concentration of metal ores, including those of copper and gold. The current paper presents a body of archaeological evidence and experimental research, which is likely to be universally relevant to the study of some of the most ancient mines and mining areas in Europe.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMETALLA→Same topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies→French-language works237,207→