Interprétation de la variabilité technologique de deux industries du Paléolithique moyen ancien du Bergeracois.: Cantalouette 1 et Combe Brune 3 (Creysse, Dordogne). Contexte géoarchéologique et chronologique, analyse techno-économique.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two early Middle Palaeolithic, open-air sites were recently excavated near Creysse, in the Dordogne region. Cantalouette 1 is dated to 223,000 BP and Combe Brune 3 to 156,000 BP. Both sites yielded lithic industries strongly dominated by bifacial shaping, associated with more occasional flake production. At Cantalouette 1, several groups of bifacial tools were described based on the association of specific edge forms and prehensile zones. It appears that the shaped pieces were used near their production location, indicating a unity between the zones of production and use at this site. A relationship seems to exist between the flaking (debitage) and shaping productions since nearly one quarter of the bifacial tools were made on flakes. At Combe Brune 3, each bifacial tool is unique. Other bifacial tools produced at the site were exported, and a high number of edge sharpening flakes suggest that bifacial tools produced elsewhere were brought to this site. The processes of shaping and flaking sometimes succeed each other on the same blocks with mixed conceptual schemes. Moreover, the flake tools were used in place, probably for skin working activities. These two industries attest to specific behaviours associated with bifacial tools and flake tools. At Cantalouette 1, they were collective, while at Combe Brune 3 they were more individual. The comparison of these two sites allows us to formulate a hypothesis concerning the modes of circulation and utilization of bifacial tools over a single territory that includes production, consumption and mixed activity zones.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".