MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1929259451 · doi:10.21971/p7wc7t

Roman Baths: An Alternate Mode of Viewing the Evidence

2008· article· en· W1929259451 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Tanya K. Henderson

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossing boundaries · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArgument (complex analysis)Mode (computer interface)Social functionHistoryFunction (biology)AestheticsArtVisual artsLiteratureComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Roman baths are an important component in furthering our knowledge of Roman social life. They functioned as more than just a locus for cleansing the body. Currently, the literary sources provide the most details about the various social activities that occurred in the baths. However, where these activities took place within the complexes remains unclear. Archaeological reports do not adequately address how the rooms functioned. The argument presented here outlines some of the problems with the current methodology for examining room function in room baths. Then, using the site of Hammat Gader in Israel, introduces a different mode of viewing the evidence.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.015
Scholarly communication0.0160.012
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.195 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrossing boundariesSame topicArchaeology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207