Astronomical Alignments at Teotihuacan, Mexico
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
Abstract It is known that the grid pattern characterizing the city layout of Teotihuacan incorporates two slightly different groups of alignments, skewed approximately 15.5° and 16.5° clockwise from cardinal directions. I argue that these alignments were dictated by deliberate and astronomically functional orientations of the Pyramid of the Sun and the Ciudadela. The two structures recorded sunrises and sunsets on two different sets of dates, allowing the use of an observational calendar composed of intervals that included multiples of 20 days and a 260-day period. The evidence presented suggests also that the location of the Sun Pyramid was not determined by the cave that is now underneath the structure and is probably human-made, but rather by a combination of astronomical and topographic criteria: the place allowed the temple built there to be oriented both to sunrises and sunsets on significant dates and, in the perpendicular direction, to Cerro Gordo to the north; furthermore, sunrises on the so-called quarter-days of the year could be observed from the same spot over a prominent mountain on the eastern horizon. The dates corresponding to the Teotihuacan alignments are attested also at other central Mexican archaeological sites and must have been employed, primarily, for scheduling agricultural and associated ritual activities in the yearly cycle.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 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 it