Jensen's Farm: a study in replicated site surface collection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In May-June 1978 and 1979 surface collections were undertaken at Jensen's Farm, an early twentieth century homesteading site twenty miles north of Dauphin, Manitoba, to determine the extent to which the results obtained through site surface collection could: 1) be replicated in terms of the frequencies and spatial distributions of artifact classes recovered, and 2) consistently isolate the location, size, shape, and function of the original features known to have existed at Jensen's Farm. Frequency tables, chi-square, and SAS-produced artifact plots were used in conjunction with scale drawings of Jensen's Farm to assess the results obtained. The results suggest that, even on a highly disturbed site such as Jensen's Farm, it is possible to replicate the general rank-order of artifact classes recovered and the general patterns and dispersions of artifacts plotted. Acceptable ranges of variation, rather than results of no significant statistical difference, should be expected given the indeterminate nature of intervening factors and the basic incomparability of artifact fragments as comparative units. Correspondence to the original Jensen's Farm features proved to be a partial one in terms of both the artifact content recovered and the spatial distributions plotted. Based on the results obtained here, it is advocated that surface collection be conducted wherever irreversible resource management decisions are to be made or where time and funding permit the luxury.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".