Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'étude d'un cratère à colonnettes à figures noires exposé au Musée des Antiquités gréco-romaines (Université d'Ottawa) a révélé plusieurs contradictions qui justifièrent d'entreprendre une analyse de thermoluminescence afin de déterminer si le vase était antique. Cette analyse démontra que le vase n'était pas antique; cependant ce cratère s'avère un exemple pédagogique intéressant tant du point de vue de la découverte de l'intention initiale de l'artiste que de celui de la méthodologie utilisée pour bien mettre en relief ses caractéristiques. L'analyse stylistique du vase indique que le peintre puisa son inspiration dans une gamme de sources visuelles, disparates et distinctes. La fluorescence induite par ultraviolet laissa aussi apparaître La fluorescence induite par ultraviolet dévoila aussi que l'objet fut lourdement surpeint, suggérant la restauration d'un vase ancien. On prévoit soumettre le cratère à colonnettes à des analyses afin d'identifier les composants du surpeint et de déterminer aussi la technique de sa reconstitution.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.002 |
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".