Bibliographic record
Abstract
column samples were numbered sequentially.A few faunal remains were found in these samples.Layers 1-1 through 1-3 equate with Subzone IVc.Layers 1- 4 through 1-8 equate with Subzone IVb.Layer 1-9 equates with Subzone IVa.Layer 1-10 equates with Subzone IIIh.Layers 2-1 and 2-2 equate with Subzone IIIg.Layer 2-3 equates with Subzone IIIf.Layer 2-4 equates with Subzones IIId an IIIe.Layer 2-5 equates with Subzones IIIb and IIIc.Layer 3-1 equates with Subzone IIIa.Layer 3-2 equates with Subzone IId.Layers 4-1 through 4-4 equate with Subzone IIc.Layers 5-1, 6-1 through 6-3 equate with Subzone IIb.Unit 7 Layers 1-1 through 1-6 equate with Subzone IVc.Layers 1-7 through 1-11 equate with Subzone IVb.Layers 1-12 and 1-13 equate with Subzone IVa.Layers 1-14, 2-1 through 2-4 equate with Subzone IIIh.Layers 2-5 through 2-8 equate with Subzone IIIg.Layers 2-10 through 2-12 and layers 3 and 4 equate with Subzone IIIf.Layer 5-1 equates with Subzones IIId and IIIe.Layer 5-2 equates with Subzone IIIc.Layers 5-3 and 5-4 equate with Subzone IIIb.Layers 5-5 through 5-9 equate with Subzone IIIa.Layers 5-10 and 5-11 equate with Subzone IId.Layer 6-1 equates with Subzones IIb and IIc.Unit 9 Layers 1-1 and 1-2 equate with Subzone IVc.Layers 1-2 through 1-5 equate with Subzone IVb.Layer 1-6 equates with Subzones IIIh and IVa.Layers 2-1 to 2-4 equate with Subzone IIIg.Layers 2-5 through 2-7 equate with Subzone IIIf.Layers 2-8 and 2-9 equate with Subzones IIId and IIIe.Layer 2-10 equates with Subzone IIIc.Layer 2-11 equates with Subzones IIIa and IIIb.Layer 3-1 equates with Subzone IId.Layers 3-2 equate with Subzones IIb and IIc Unit 11 Layers 1-1 to 1-3 equate with Subzone IVc Layers 1-4 to 1-8 equate with Subzone IVb
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.287 | 0.222 |
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".