Rapport d’analyse sur des artefacts de plomb du Palais de l’intendant, Québec.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce rapport rend compte de l'analyse d'artefacts de plomb (munitions, coulée de plomb, culots de creuset) provenant des contextes français du site du Palais de l'intendant.L'objectif premier consiste à déterminer la ou les sources du plomb utilisé pour fabriquer ces artefacts en s'appuyant sur la composition isotopique du plomb.Au-delà de la collection du Palais, notre échantillon comporte aussi des artefacts de plomb provenant u site Cartier-Roberval, du fort Michilimackinac, de quelques sites d'Alabama dont celui de Vieux-Mobile, des épaves de la Natière (Saint-Malo), de La Boussole (Îles Salomon) et du Elizabeth and Mary (Anse-aux-Bouleaux), du site de Loyola en Guyane française, de Penouille en Gaspésie et du Rocher de la chapelle à l'Île aux Oies.Nos résultats indiquent qu'une forte proportion du plomb des échantillons est d'origine anglaise, de la région de Pennines, mais du plomb extrait du Massif central s'y retrouve aussi.Par contre, aucun artefact n'affiche une signature isotopique du plomb qui permette de le rattacher aux gîtes de plomb Mississippi, du Missouri ou même de Petit-Gaspé où à la demande de l'intendant Talon on fit des essais entre 1666 et 1673.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.003 |
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".