Late Paleolithic whale bone tools reveal human and whale ecology in the Bay of Biscay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Reconstructing how prehistoric humans used the products obtained from large cetaceans is challenging, but key to understand the history of early human coastal adaptations. Here we report the multiproxy analysis (ZooMS, radiocarbon, stable isotopes) of worked objects made of whale bone, and unworked whale bone fragments, found at Upper Paleolithic sites (Magdalenian) around the Bay of Biscay. Taxonomic identification using ZooMS reveals at least five species of large whales, expanding the range of known taxa whose products were utilized by humans in this period. Radiocarbon places the use of whale products ca. 20–14 ka cal BP, with a maximum diffusion and diversity at 17.5–16 ka cal BP, making it the oldest evidence of whale-bone working to our knowledge. δ 13 C and δ 15 N stable isotope values reflect taxon-specific differences in foraging behavior. The diversity and chronology of these cetacean populations attest to the richness of the marine ecosystem of the Bay of Biscay in the late Paleolithic, broadening our understanding of coastal adaptations at that time.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".