Lamar County, Texas (41LR2), GTW-535 [TX 148/1]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SITE NAME OR SITE NUMBER: George T. Wright Collection, Lamar County, Texas. Wright’s notebook indicates this vessel came from a burial at the Sanders site (41LR2), near but not from either of the two mounds at the site (Jackson et al. 2000; Krieger 1946). VESSEL NO.: GTW-535 [TX 148/1], Burial Lamar VESSEL FORM: Bowl with four lip appliqued lugs NON-PLASTICS AND PASTE: grog RIM AND LIP FORM: Inverted rim and rounded lip CORE COLOR: G (fired in a reducing environment and cooled in the open air) INTERIOR SURFACE COLOR: dark grayish-brown EXTERIOR SURFACE COLOR: reddish-brown; fire clouds on the body WALL THICKNESS (IN MM): rim, 7.6 mm INTERIOR SURFACE TREATMENT: smoothed EXTERIOR SURFACE TREATMENT: burnished HEIGHT (IN CM): 10.2 ORIFICE DIAMETER (IN CM): 12.5 DIAMETER AT BOTTOM OF RIM OR NECK (IN CM): 12.3 BASE DIAMETER (IN CM) AND SHAPE OF BASE: 5.2 cm, circular and flat ESTIMATED VOLUME (IN LITERS): 0.6 DECORATION (INCLUDING MOTIF AND ELEMENTS WHEN APPARENT): the rim panel has four sets of vertical and diagonal engraved lines as well as a single horizontal engraved line at the base of the rim panel. The appliqued lugs divide the engraved sets. PIGMENT USE AND LOCATION ON VESSEL: none TYPE AND VARIETY (IF KNOWN): Sanders Engraved (see Suhm and Jelks 1962:137 and Plate 69) Sanders Engraved bowl, GTW-535.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.534 | 0.317 |
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".