MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613135829 · doi:10.1017/s006824541700003x

ACCESS TO UPPER FLOORS AND AN EARLY LIGHT WELL AT EM II VASILIKI

2017· article· en· W2613135829 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph W. Shaw

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annual of the British School at Athens · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Architectural Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectureElitePrehistorySkyArchaeologyStyle (visual arts)Architectural styleHistoryVisual artsGeographyPaleontologyGeologyAncient historyArtMeteorologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discussing Early Minoan (EM) architecture in Crete, it is difficult for one to bypass the site of Vasiliki, located on the Isthmus of Ierapetra. Vasiliki was occupied during a number of prehistoric periods. Its EM IIB houses are among the best preserved, incorporating architectural features that reveal how the inhabitants managed the transition between single- and two-storied buildings, and how they, usually, reached their upper levels, probably without the use of stairways. This paper singles out three separate houses from among the group of rooms originally called the ‘Red House’ by its discoverer, Richard Seager; it presents their sequencing, the order in which they were probably built, and how their first floors and roofs were reached. Additionally, a detailed study of House C suggests that one of the large ‘rooms’ was actually open to the sky, and had served partly as an interior court, which may well have been the predecessor of the later interior courts (or light wells) characterising the elite architectural style, typical of the later Middle and Late Minoan periods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annual of the British School at AthensSame topicHistorical and Architectural StudiesFrench-language works237,207