Bibliographic record
Abstract
The buildings on the citadel of Nimrud, ancient Kalah or Kalḫu, constitute a most impressive monument (Fig. 1; Postgate and Reade 1980), but the sporadic way in which they have been excavated leaves many questions unanswered. One puzzling area lies north and north-east of the great North-West Palace. It includes the ziggurrat, and the shrines of Ninurta, of Ištar Šarrat Nipḫi (formerly read Bēlat Māti) and of the Kidmuri (or Ištar Bēlat Kidmuri). Their interrelationships have yet to be established, and texts refer to further gods resident at Kalah. Excavations in this quarter were conducted by Layard, Rassam, Rawlinson, Loftus and Smith in the nineteenth century, and by Mallowan in the 1950s, and were resumed by staff of the Iraq Directorate-General of Antiquities in the early 1970s. This paper summarizes some of what we know or may deduce about the area, and defines some of the remaining problems; it does not include, except in passing, the relatively well-known Nabû Temple to the south. I have endeavoured to refer to all items except sherds found during British excavations in the area, but have not attempted the detailed publication which many of the objects, groups of objects, and pottery records may merit. A possible arrangement of the buildings in this area of Nimrud about 800 BC is given in Fig. 2, but it is a reconstruction from inadequate evidence. The relative dates, dimensions, locations and orientations of many excavated structures are arguable, and the plans published by different excavators cannot be fully reconciled. Major uncertainties concern the ziggurrat, the citadel-wall, the Kidmuri shrine and the area between the North-West Palace and the Ninurta shrine. There are many minor uncertainties. My reconstruction includes speculative features, while omitting some excavated walls which I regard as secondary.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 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".