MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416842048 · doi:10.1017/s0956536125100655

Human-Stone Interactions in the Precolonial Maya Lowlands: Working and Learning with Limestone

2025· article· en· W4416842048 on OpenAlexaff
Céline Gillot, Kenneth E. Seligson, Soledad Ortiz, Bosiljka Glumac, Carlos Peraza Lope

Bibliographic record

VenueAncient Mesoamerica · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMayaScholarshipPerspective (graphical)Process (computing)Work (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper considers the complex entanglements from which stones and stone craftspeople emerged in the precolonial Maya world. Drawing from recent scholarship that emphasizes the relational and processual nature of making and knowing, it adopts a multi-practice perspective to explore how humans transformed limestone into knowable and workable materials and how, in turn, limestone transformed humans into knowledgeable and skilled individuals. Geoarchaeological, archaeometric, and experimental data from the central and northern Maya lowlands are combined to identify choices and preferences in selecting, extracting, and processing calcareous materials, and to examine what these reveal about past knowledge and skills. We then turn our attention to the ways in which quarry workers, lime producers, and toolmakers learned to work with stone. We argue that becoming attuned to limestone was a sociomaterial process that involved repeated interactions with both material elements and social actors. Our discussion highlights the active role of limestone not only in shaping learning experiences but also in facilitating connections between diverse practices, and thus contributing to a dynamic, interconnected landscape of knowledge.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAncient MesoamericaSame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207