MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025228063 · doi:10.3406/bch.2003.7127

Ein klassisches Haus in Delos ? Zur Chronologie der Maison O in der Insula III des Quartier du théâtre

2003· article· en· W2025228063 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Monika Trümper

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin de correspondance hellénique · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Mediterranean Archaeology and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Period (music)ArtArchaeologyAncient historyArt historyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses the recent hypothesis, according to which a type of house hitherto believed to belong to the Hellenistic period on Delos could go back to the Classical period (5th c. BC): a simple elongated house, organised around a court, into which a typical group of two or three rooms (oecus major and annexe[s]) opens at the back, and a vestibule and service rooms in the front. A reexamination is proposed of House Ο in Insula III of the Theatre Quarter, which serves as a proof of this hypothesis. Based on the visible walls, four phases can be distinguished: it was only in the second phase that the house under consideration here was constructed, integrating preexisting walls of the Classical period (first phase) ; it was part of the first "urbanising programme" attested in the quarter and cannot antedate the construction of the theatre in the 3rd century BC. After a transformation with embellishments (third phase), in the course of which were added latrines, additional rooms and a colonnade, an oil-press was installed in the house at the beginning of the lst century BC (fourth phase).

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin de correspondance helléniqueSame topicAncient Mediterranean Archaeology and HistoryFrench-language works237,207