MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1565072858 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511750830.009

The war in Samnium, 217–209

2010· other· en· W1565072858 on OpenAlexaff
Michael P. Fronda

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClassical Antiquity Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hannibal achieved some measure of success in eliciting defections from among the Samnites, especially in southern and western Samnium (the lands of the Hirpini and Caudini, respectively). Several communities of the Hirpini came over to Hannibal in the immediate wake of the battle of Cannae. According to Livy (23.1.1–3), Hannibal was invited to Compsa, which then fell into his hands peacefully. After this, Hannibal placed part of his army under the command of Mago, whom ‘he ordered either to receive the cities of this region that were then defecting from the Romans, or to compel those to defect that were refusing to’. The passage clearly illustrates that other Hirpinian communities began to fall away from Rome at about the same time as Compsa. In 215 the Romans reportedly conducted raids against the Hirpini in the vicinity of Nola, obviously against towns that had defected. It is likely that they had rebelled in the previous year. Besides Compsa, the names of only a few rebellious Hirpinian towns are known: Vercellium, Vescellium, Sicilinum, Meles and Marmoreae. Similarly, we hear of the Romans capturing towns that belonged to the Caudini or laying waste to their territory, indicating that several had defected. M. Claudius Marcellus and Q. Fabius Maximus conducted campaigns in the vicinity of Caudium in 215 and 214, during which the Romans took Compulteria/Conpulteria, Trebula Balliensis, Austicula and Telesia.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClassical Antiquity Studies→French-language works237,207→