MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2515751336 · doi:10.4000/syria.3104

Intentional Cooking Pot Deposits in Late Roman Jerash (Northwest Quarter)

2015· article· en· W2515751336 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Achim Lichtenberger, Rubina Raja

Bibliographic record

VenueSyria · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Context (archaeology)ArchaeologyScope (computer science)HistoryMAGIC (telescope)GermanGeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract – During the 2012 campaign of the Danish-German Northwest Quarter Project in Jerash, ancient Gerasa, three intentionally deposited cooking pots were found in a fill layer. Two of them were almost intact and discovered with ashes and other finds inside. Another one was fragmented and also held ashes inside. The cooking pot deposits are likely to have been termination deposits. It is the scope of this paper to discuss the context and function of these deposits and of comparable evidences. No completely conclusive explanation for the three deposited cooking pots from the Northwest Quarter can be given, but the context gives clear indications that they were deposited intentionally and were only in some sort of use for a short period of time. They were not part of an installation, such as a kitchen or production complex and they were not part of an ancient dump. The homogenous fill layers surrounding them indicate a rapid and intentional filling —a process in which these deposited pots played a role. We here suggest a possible ritual or magic function of these pots as termination deposits, but this can only be confirmed further by comparable finds excavated and documented in detail at other sites as well as better knowledge of the room that was backfilled and ritually closed with termination deposits. The main purpose of this article is to raise awareness of such deposits in archaeological contexts, which may too often be overlooked.

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 score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSyriaSame topicArchaeology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207