Comments on clay bodies used by two potters in the Port St Johns region of the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This collaborative study has brought together our various backgrounds in art history, ceramics practice, \nchemistry, and clay mineralogy, so as to contextualise properties and ideas about the clay bodies \nused by octogenarian potters Alice Gqa Nongebeza and Debora Nomathamsanqa Ntloya. Nongebeza \nworks from her homestead at Nkonxeni village [31º 37’59.66”S, 29º 23’22.26”E] in the Tombo area, \nand Ntloya is based at Qhaka village [31º36’34.04”S, 29º 24’34.78”E] in the Chaguba area, these sites \nbeing within about 5 kilometres of each other on the R61 road from Mthatha towards Port St Johns. \nWorking separately, these potters have been digging clay from their respective mining sites and making \npots for approximately the past sixty years. In this paper notions about why those specific clays \nwere chosen and why their characteristics are desirable are enframed by comparative chemical analyses \nthereof as well as by a broad overview that places these clays in a wider perspective.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it