Housepit 54 Project, Bridge River site, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The data, linked at the bottom of this record, were collected between May 15, 2013 and June 30, 2024. Lithic (tool and debitage) and faunal data coding sheets are provided. All are raw data on artifacts and faunal and floral remains from the Housepit 54 excavation in British Columbia. All data cross-checked for coding errors. See attached coding sheets for lithic tools/debitage and faunal remains; see attached coding sheet and associated graphics for house strata and excavation units. Number of variables: data on each item excluding provenience information Lithic Tools: 29 Lithic Debitage: 10 Faunal: 26 Botanicals 2013: 28 Botanicals 2014 Part 1: 27 Botanicals 2014 Part 2: 23 Botanicals 2016 Part 1: 28 Botanicals 2016 Part 2 Earth Oven Synthesis: 27 Number of cases/rows: Lithic Tools: 1926 Lithic Debitage: 14,998 Faunal: 46,600 Botanicals 2013: 42 Botanicals 2014 Part 1: 20 Botanicals 2014 Part 2: 40 Botanicals 2016 Part 1: 40 Botanicals 2016 Part 2 Earth Oven Synthesis: 30
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.060 | 0.012 |
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".