MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W83449328 · doi:10.3406/bspf.2010.13909

Une occupation de la fin du Dernier Maximum glaciaire dans les Pyrénées : le Magdalénien inférieur de la grotte des Scilles (Lespugue, Haute-Garonne)

2010· article· fr· W83449328 on OpenAlexaff
Mathieu Langlais, Jean‐Marc Pétillon, Sophie A. de Beaune, Pierre Cattelain, François-Xavier Chauvière, Claire Letourneux, Carolyn Barshay-Szmidt, Claire Bellier, R.P. Beukens, Francine David

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin de la Société préhistorique française · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Canadian institutionsMusée de la CivilisationUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les fouilles menées par R. et S. de Saint-Périer dans les années 1920 à la grotte des Scilles (Lespugue, Haute-Garonne) ont livré un ensemble de vestiges attribués au Magdalénien. L’étude de cette collection ancienne offre désormais la possibilité de préciser cette caractérisation à la lumière de travaux récents sur cette période. La présentation des différentes catégories de vestiges (industries lithique et osseuse, faune, parure, art mobilier et lampe) permet d’appréhender l’ensemble des registres d’activités documentés sur le site. En particulier, cet article présente les éléments typotechnologiques qui fournissent des arguments pour rattacher l’occupation de cette cavité au Magdalénien inférieur. Une date 14C par SMA situe cette période autour de 16000 BP (19400 cal. BP) à la grotte des Scilles. La mise en évidence de ce premier jalon pyrénéen conduit ensuite les auteurs à discuter du peuplement magdalénien à la fin du Dernier Maximum glaciaire dans le Sud-Ouest de la France et le Nord de l’Espagne.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin de la Société préhistorique françaiseSame topicPleistocene-Era Hominins and ArchaeologyFrench-language works237,207