Examination and Analysis of Etruscan Wall Paintings at Caere, Italy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1983, the excavation of the ancient city of Caere near Rome, which became a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2004, led to the unearthing of an underground sanctuary dating from the early third century bc. Known as the ‘Hypogaeum of Clepsina’, it consists of an underground room decorated with frescoes, drawings and inscriptions. The initiation of a new excavation campaign at Caere in 2012 provided the opportunity to study this rare example of Etruscan wall paintings of a non‐sepulchral nature from the Hellenistic era. The paintings were documented, photographed and samples were removed for analysis using a combination of scientific techniques. The observation that at least some of the painting was done on wet plaster supports the conclusion that the frescos are contemporaneous to the plastering of the walls in the hypogaeum in approximately 273 bc. The plaster is lime‐based and aggregate materials include potassium feldspar, clinopyroxene, quartz, hematite and magnetite. No organic binding medium was identified in the paint, suggesting a lime water binder. Paint materials identified are Egyptian blue, red iron oxide (hematite), yellow iron oxide (goethite), charcoal black, quartz, silicates and calcite. All the paint samples show a mineral accretion layer at the upper surface, caused by recrystallization of salts.
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 | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".