The study of Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic in Portugal: a historiographic perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The scientific study of the Upper Palaeolithic, Epipaleolithic and Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in Portugal has its roots in the mid-19th century. The 2nd Geological Commission, created by a decree of the queen D. Maria II (1857), played a fundamental role in the study of this period and in the recognition of the first Palaeolithic and Mesolithic deposits. This Institution, with brilliant elements such as Pereira da Costa, Carlos Ribeiro, Nery Delgado, have allowed the implementation of Prehistory and Archeological studies and brought worldwide recognition to the deposits such as the caves of the Casa da Moura and Furninha or the Muge Mesolithic shellmiddens. With the 20th century, the work of scientific research on hunter-gatherers was centered mainly on the Universities of Porto and Lisbon, the National Museum of Archeology and the Geological Service, developing work predominantly on the Atlantic coast and in the valleys of the great rivers Portuguese. The research in Africa with Mendes Corrêa and Santos Júnior through the Anthropological Missions of Estado Novo in the 1930’s must also be mentioned. In the last quarter of the century. Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic research was a major development not only in the interest of some, unfortunately scarce, Portuguese university students, but also by foreigner experts. Since the last decade of the millennium, the number of doctorates and Portuguese experts in these periods has greatly grown with the implementation of university studies in the Universities of Lisbon and Algarve, from which there has been a continued development of the study of the Upper Palaeolithic, Epipaleolithic, and Mesolithic in Portugal.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".