MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2237586123

Status identification on the road: requisitioning of travel resources by senators, equestrians, and centurions without diplomata. A note on the Sagalassus inscription (SEG XXVI, 1392)

2012· article· en· W2237586123 on OpenAlexaff
Lukas Lemcke

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicByzantine Studies and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReignIdentification (biology)DocumentationAntiqueRanking (information retrieval)Rank (graph theory)Order (exchange)HistoryPolitical scienceLawComputer scienceBusinessAncient historyMathematicsArtificial intelligenceCombinatorics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article seeks to answer the question posed in a study which I\nundertook with Altay Coşkun (forthcoming in Latomus 2013) how high-ranking\nusers (senators, knights, and centurions) of the imperial information and\ntransportation system (most commonly known by its late antique name, cursus\npublicus) would prove their social class, military rank, and official nature of\ntheir journey in order to qualify for requisitioning at stations (mansiones,\nmutationes) without permits (diplomata). Using the results of this study as\nbasis, I offer a survey over the susceptibility of each of the classes of\nhigh-ranking users for status usurpation. This section is followed up by a discussion\nof the various ways in which identification was possible, including status\nsymbols (ornamenta), travel permissions (legatio libera, commeatus) as well as\nother written documentation (mandata, codicilli, army records). It will thus be\nshown that there were acceptably reliable mechanisms in place to prove one's\nsocial status. This result will further corroborate the findings of our\nprevious study that permits, in accordance with the edict of Sotidius Strabo\n(SEG XXVI, 1392 [20/37]), were not obligatory for certain status groups.\nPermits became a requirement for all users only in the reign of Claudius.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.848

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicByzantine Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207