Bibliographic record
Abstract
The archaeological study of glass bead proveniences raises theoretical questions regarding the idea of “beadmaking centers” as defined by typological, technological, and geochemical means. Also important for defining beadmaking centers are historical sources in various languages. In the 19th century, French scholars interested in glassmaking in Normandy noted beadmaking ca. 1590-1635. Their publications show a rural cottage industry in the county of Eu and the forest of Brotonne, and an urban guild of patenôtriers in Rouen. While the historical data mostly show the production and export of rosary beads, the Normandy “beadmaking center” coincides with a major outfitting region of the late 16th and 17th-century transatlantic fur trade. This geographic correlation allows us to hypothesize that some French beads found in North America may have originated in Rouen. Interestingly, an archaeological collection from 1869 contains a chevron bead production tube and two frit-core (faïence) beads, similar to North American examples, in a Rouen production context.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".