Lithic Procurement and Provisioning at the Lower Palaeolithic Site of Shishan Marsh 1 in the Azraq Basin, Jordan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Considerations of the landscape, the distribution and quality of resources, distances to outcrops, and proximity to other resources factor into the procurement decision-making by prehistoric foragers. However, the patterns of resource exploitation and utilisation are likely to vary by region, and those exhibited in marginal environments are not fully explored. This report focuses on the nature of lithic procurement and provisioning at the Lower Palaeolithic site of Shishan Marsh 1 in the Azraq Basin, Jordan. It draws upon several lines of evidence, including provenance and use-wear analyses performed on the biface assemblage. The results indicate raw material exploitation occurred at local and non-local distances to the site and the lithics were used for a variety of activities on medium-hard materials. Foragers moved toward the wetlands from significant distances on the surrounding landscape, likely bringing finished tools and, after use, discarding them in relatively good condition. The accumulation over time of ready-to-use tools at Shishan Marsh 1 points to a provisioning of the wetland margins for future needs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".