A Formal Test of the Origin of Variation in North American Early Paleoindian Projectile Points
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently it has been suggested that variation in the form of Early Paleoindian projectile points across North America was the result of drift rather than regional adaptation (Morrow and Morrow 1999). Here, we test this hypothesis quantitatively with matrix correlation statistics. Using a sample of Early Paleoindian point assemblages from across the continent we attempt to correlate variation in point shape with several measures of late Pleistocene period regional variation including net primary production, prey availability, prey selection, and prey body size. We find no significant correlations between point shape and measures of regional variation, suggesting that functional modifications to points within specific regional biomes were minimal. We do find evidence of spatial autocorrelation as the regional variation in point shape correlates positively with geographic distances among sites, a pattern consistent with recent, shared ancestry. Our findings provide support for the drift hypothesis posed by Morrow and Morrow (1999). We interpret these results as suggesting that despite the wide variation in regional environmental conditions across late Pleistocene period North America not enough time elapsed during the Early Paleoindian period for these local selective gradients to have led to significant changes in point shape.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it