MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7024613536

SMALL POINT ARCHAIC LITHIC PROCUREMENT AND USE IN SOUTHERN ONTARIO

2008· article· en· W7024613536 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadioactive Decay and Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcurementArchaic periodSettlement (finance)Point (geometry)Projectile pointExcavation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis examines the lithic procurement and use behaviours of Small Point Archaic people occupying southern Ontario. The ultimate goal of this thesis was to test the “Direct-Embedded” procurement model originally proposed by Ellis and Spence (1997) in which they argued that Small Point Archaic people used mainly two toolstone sources and traversed most of southern Ontario in their seasonal rounds. An examination of data collected from 54 Small Point Archaic sites has shown that direct-embedded procurement of lithic resources was the norm at most sites, but Small Point Archaic people were not traveling all over southern Ontario utilizing both Kettle Point and Onondaga cherts during normal settlement movements. The most significant finding from the lithic data collected is that Onondaga chert is present at all sites and is being exchanged at a regional level in the form of points and preforms to areas far distant from the primary outcrops.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.122 · 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