Bibliographic record
Abstract
The end of the Peloponnesian War saw the beginning of animosity between Thebes and Sparta, as so often happens between victorious allies after a bitter war. The first incident occurred after an acrimonious disagreement over the treatment of the defeated. The Thebans, joined by the Corinthians and many other Greeks, demanded the destruction of Athens, which the Spartans refused because of past Athenian services in the defense of Greece. The Thebans further angered the Spartans when they, alone of the allies, demanded a tithe of the spoils of war. The quarrel between the Thebans and Spartans held unexpected results for the Athenians, for the Thebans totally reversed their hostile policy towards Athens. They began by giving refuge to Thrasybulus and his followers after their exile by the Thirty Tyrants. When Thrasybulus seized the Piraeus, the Spartans ordered a campaign to dislodge him, but both the Thebans and Corinthians refused to participate (Xen. Hell. 2, 4, 30; 3, 5, 5). This sudden change of policy was based only on mutual hostility toward Sparta, apart from which Thebes, Corinth, and Athens shared no other joint interests. The Thebans strove to maintain their political hegemony in Boeotia, the Corinthians to win greater independence from Spartan leadership of the Peloponnesian League, and the Athenians to restore their maritime power. For the moment, however, these aspirations were hardly discordant, for success in each area would curtail the power of Sparta, the common goal.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".