MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398199360 · doi:10.1080/14614103.2024.2356945

Climate Change and Indigenous Subsistence in the Thompson River Watershed (British Columbia) in the Late Holocene

2024· article· en· W4398199360 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ian Hutchinson

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Archaeology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubsistence agricultureHoloceneIndigenousClimate changeArchaeologyGeographyWatershedZooarchaeologyPhysical geographyHistoryEcologyOceanographyGeologyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Indigenous peoples of the Thompson River watershed on the northern Columbia Plateau traditionally subsisted in winter on dried salmon, dried roots and berries from upland meadows, and game. A summed probability distribution (SPDF) based on 54 radiocarbon ages from twenty-eight winter villages and summer fishing camps along that river exhibits volatile activity in anti-phase with an SPDF derived from 77 radiocarbon ages from twenty-six sites in the neighbouring uplands in the 2500–500 cal BP interval. Activity levels on the riverbanks decline after ∼2000 cal BP, increase rapidly from ∼1600 cal BP to ∼1350 cal BP, fall dramatically in the next century, then rise again after ∼700 cal BP, echoing patterns at other upriver fisheries on the northern Columbia plateau. Periods of increased activity on the Thompson riverbank are linked to robust runs of sockeye salmon, prompted by cooler/wetter phases of regional climate, and marked by higher lake levels, glacial advances, and increased rates of coastal upwelling in the northeast Pacific. Less reliable salmon harvests in the intervening periods are indicated by increases in activity in the uplands, with a concomitant greater reliance on roots and game in the local diet.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
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 studies0.0000.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.171 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ArchaeologySame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207