ARCTIC Dorset Settlement and Subsistence in Northern Labrador
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT. Archaeological surveys in northern Labrador have supplemented previous evidence from the central coast concerning the Dorset subsistence-settlement system. The evidence suggests a flexible Dorset economic base capable of exploiting a wide variety of environments; but lacking full development of certain food procurement systems that would later become important in Thule culture. In particular, site location and faunal analysis indicate that breathing hole sealing was not strongly developed by the Dorset, and that winter and spring settlement was oriented toward ice edge seal and walrus hunting. RÉSUMÉ. Les releves archeologiques dans le Labrador Septentrional ont confirm6 les preuves Bvidentes anterieures d’un s y s t h e de colonisation de subsistence, à I’Cpoque Dorset, sur la côte du Labrador Central. II parait evident, qu’à I’bpoque Dorset, la base de I’economie etait assez souple pour exploiter une grande variete d’environnements mais sans atteindre un plein développement des moyens de se procurer certaine nourriture comme cela arrivera plus tard dans la civilisation de Thule. En particulier, l’emplacement des sites et les analyses faunistiques indiquent que la chasse au phoque aux trous de respiration, n’&ait pas pratiquee à I’epoque Dorset; les colonies d’hiver et de printemps etaient plutôt fixtes en vue d’une chasse au phoque et au morse àla limite de la banquise.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".