Archaeological evidence of resource utilisation of walrus, Odobenus rosmarus, over the past two millennia: A systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<ns3:p> The walrus, <ns3:italic>Odobenus rosmarus,</ns3:italic> is an iconic pinniped and predominant molluscivore that is well adapted to Arctic and subarctic environments. Its circumpolar distribution, large body size and ivory tusks facilitated its vital role as food, raw material (for tools and art), income, and cultural influence on many Arctic Indigenous communities for millennia. Intensification of hunting (often due to the arrival of Europeans, especially between the 16th and 19th centuries) to obtain ivory, hide, blubber and meat, resulted in diminished, sometimes extirpated, walrus populations. Zooarchaeological, artefactual and documentary evidence of walrus material has been collated at local and regional scales and is frequently focused on a specific culture or period of time. Systematic collation of this evidence across the Northern Hemisphere will provide insight into the chronology and circumpolar distribution of walrus hunting and provide a tool to document societal change in walrus resource use. Here, we lay out a systematic review protocol to collate records of archaeological walrus artefacts, tusks and bones that have been documented primarily within published literature to archive when and where (as feasible) walrus extractions occurred between 1 CE and 2000 CE. These data will be openly available for the scientific community. The resulting dataset will be the first to provide spatiotemporal information (including the recognition of knowledge gaps) regarding past walrus populations and extirpations on a circumpolar scale. Our protocol is published to ensure reproducibility and comparability in the future, and to encourage the adoption of systematic review methodology (including pre-published protocols) in archaeology. </ns3:p>
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 | 0.107 | 0.114 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.033 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.004 |
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".