Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World: the Cartographic Fundamentals in Retrospect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In time, space or purpose, the prospect of any close link between the Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World [1] and the Historical Atlas of Canada [2] might seem remote indeed. As editor of the former, however, I instantly realized otherwise when first encountering the reflections of the director (Dean) and two editors of the latter (Cole Harris, Holdsworth) on their experience published in Editing Early and Historical Atlases: Papers given at the 29th annual conference on editorial problems, University of Toronto, 5-6 November 1993. [3] Naturally, to learn that in a quite different field others before you had wrestled with similar dilemmas, and had chosen to resolve them in broadly similar ways, is not enough to place your own choices beyond reproach. But such a discovery does offer reassurance; it acts to relieve a depressing sense of isolation, and demonstrates that your own painful choices need no longer be regarded as merely idiosyncratic.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".