MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

FORM AND FUNCTION: THE EXPERIMENTAL USE OF ROMAN SAMIAN WARE CUPS

2008· article· en· W1938355264 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford Journal of Archaeology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient and Medieval Archaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsVictoria Park
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReplicateArchaeologyArtHistoryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary. Wear‐patterns inside Roman samian ware vessels provide a clue as to how the pots were used. The wear repeatedly seen in the cups, Dragendorff 27 and Dragendorff 33, is particularly distinctive. This paper reports the results of using reproduction cups to replicate the patterns in order to discover how these may have been formed. The results suggest that Dragendorff 27 was used in the kitchen as a mortar, while Dragendorff 33 was a wine‐drinking vessel. Evidence from historical sources and graffiti supports this view, and suggests that the inhabitants of Roman Britain were conversant with Roman ways of cooking and dining.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.183 · 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