Bibliographic record
Abstract
The collective identity of each early civilization was expressed by a distinctive and highly elaborated upper-class culture that formally symbolized that civilization's unity and differentiated it from neighbouring societies. The patronage of these elite traditions helped to distinguish the upper from the lower classes while identifying the upper classes with the civilization as a whole. Each early civilization possessed its own religious beliefs, myths, and festivals and its own distinctive style(s) of art, architecture, music, and dance. The most ambitious forms of conspicuous consumption in early civilizations were the sponsorship by rulers and the upper classes of the production of monumental architecture and high-quality works of art. The deployment of large amounts of lower-class labour to erect buildings that became symbols of upper-class dominance constituted further evidence of the power of the upper classes. In territorial states, the culture of rural dwellers was regionally variable, while that of the upper classes was statewide and unitary. In city-state systems, local variants of the elite culture frequently distinguished one polity and its leaders from another, while pancivilizational similarities signalled the shared membership of the upper classes in a broader upper-class interaction network. There were, however, differences in the extent to which upper-class traditions were distinguished from those of commoners. In city-state systems, especially those that lacked a hereditary nobility, high-quality art tended to be a technically superior and aesthetically more sophisticated version of commoner art, while in territorial states it developed radically different canons and was produced by artists working full-time for the state rather than simultaneously for upper-class patrons and the marketplace.
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 | 0.003 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.003 |
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".