Landscape affordances, GIS, and the hunting landscape of rock art in the Central Iranian Plateau
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hunting is the most common narrative scene in the rock art of Iran. This prevalent use of hunting scenes, along with the potential use of some rock art regions for hunting purposes both today and in ancient times, have led to one main interpretation of rock art as depictions made by hunters and in relation to hunting activities in the Central Iranian Plateau. However, this assumption has not been thoroughly tested and is not explored on a broader landscape scale. Using a GIS-landscape approach, this study attempts to analyze the intersection of the petroglyphs, hunting blinds, and landscape affordances to reconstruct the hunting landscape of rock art in the Central Iranian Plateau. Rather than a chronological association, this approach emphasizes how the environmental affordances link the petroglyphs, hunting blinds, and hunting activities within the landscape of rock art. This suggests that the same locations and their capacities could have been recognized and used by different land users, whether contemporaneously or across different periods. Additionally, this paper discusses how the placement of petroglyphs enhanced the readability of the landscape’s affordances in relation to hunting and marked the key areas with hunting potential.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".