Review of <i>Hell Gap: A Stratified Paleoindian Campsite at the Edge of the Rockies. </i>Edited by Mary Lou Larson, Marcel Kornfeld, and George C. Frison.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Every Plains archaeologist has heard of the Hell Gap site. But few could tell you much about it. All that changes with the publication of this needed, dense, thorough collection that chronicles the life and content of this singularly important archaeological site. With 20 papers and 13 appendices, this book takes a monumental step forward in furthering our knowledge of nearly the entire Paleoindian sequence of occupation on the western Plains. Hell Gap is the type site for three Paleoindian point styles: Goshen, Hell Gap, and Frederick, and contains at least six other cultural complexes: Folsom, Midland, Agate Basin, Alberta, Eden/Scottsbluff, and Lusk. All in a stratified and fairly well-dated sequence. There are hints of Clovis, but the jury is still out. Located in eastern Wyoming, the Hell Gap site was discovered when amateur collector 1. Duguid picked up a complete Agate Basin point in 1958 (the first appendix tells his story). Sharing that information led to years of excavation by a virtual "who's who" in the history of Plains archaeology. Previously known by a few short articles and unpublished works, this volume is the first major synthesis of one of the most studied and significant sites in the Plains.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".