Les archontes du nom de Kléophanès à Delphes : note de chronologie et d’épigraphie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Archontes Called Kleophanes at Delphi: A Chronological and Epigraphical Note For a long time it was considered that only one eponymous archon of Delphi was named Kleophanes. This state of knowledge was presented by G. Daux in 1943, despite R. Flacelière's remarks (Chronologie delphique L27, 172/1 B.C.). The publication in 1949 of a text dated by an archon Kleophanes and ascribed to the 3rd century renewed the debate on the number of eponymous bearing this name and on which texts could be attributed to the year of their archonship. Through a new edition of the three texts in abeyance and a re-examination of the various available dating-criteria, we propose to correct the Chronologie delphique by adding two archons named Kleophanes in the 3rd century B.C.: - G27, 2nd quarter of the 3rd century (?), known by FD III3, 82. - K41, 2nd half of the 3rd century (?), known by FD III4, 427 V. The text BCH 63 (1939), p. 160, may be ascribed to K41 rather than to G27. The archonship L27 is still attested by the chronological list of proxenoi and by three manumission acts, but is deprived of one of his bouleutes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 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".