Dendroarchaeology of Birnirk and Thule Architectural Timbers (10–13th Centuries)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Along the coast of northwestern Alaska, architectural wood remains are well preserved in the Birnirk and Thule coastal sites of the early 2nd millennium CE. These structural wood elements are unique archives for documenting climatic variations and cultural transformations during this key development period of Inuit culture. Along this treeless Arctic coast, driftwood accumulates from the subarctic forests of interior Alaska. Except for northwestern Alaska, regional tree-ring chronologies are too short (at best 350–400 years) to successfully date archaeological wood remains from Birnirk and Thule coastal sites using conventional dendrochronology. This paper examines the potential of tree-ring derived δ18O signal to annually date eight architectural wood samples from the Rising Whale (KTZ-304) site at Cape Espenberg, northwestern Alaska. We developed a δ18O master chronology, covering the period 935–1157 CE, using five wood samples from the KTZ-304 site. Blind isotope cross-dating of individual series belonging to this δ18O master chronology (one against the other four) showed conclusive dating and a very strong coherence of the isotopic signal. We, then, used the δ18O master chronology to cross-date three other wood samples for which we knew, from previous 14C wiggle-matching procedure, the first measured ring to be in this time interval, within a ± 18 to 30-year precision. Oxygen isotope dendrochronology provided a plausible date for one of the samples (the first measured ring at 1073 CE). This preliminary study encourages us to acquire additional data to extend in time and strengthen the δ18O master chronology of northwestern Alaska (NWAK18O) and help refine our understanding of climate and culture change during the 2nd millennium CE.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".