MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2619613261 · doi:10.3406/paleo.2014.5639

On the Genesis of the Kura-Araxes phenomenon: New evidence from Nakhchivan (Azerbaijan)

2014· article· en· W2619613261 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Catherine Marro, Veli Bakhshaliyev, Rémi Berthon

Bibliographic record

VenuePaléorient · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenonMulticulturalismGeographyQuarter (Canadian coin)Cultural phenomenonSettlement (finance)PotteryPolitical scienceHistoryArchaeologySociologySocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The formative processes of the Kura-Araxes cultural complex, in particular the date and circumstances of its rise, have been debated for decades. This article takes advantage of the recent data retrieved from Ovçular Tepesi, a Late Chalcolithic settlement located in Nakhchivan by the Arpaçay river, to demonstrate that the earliest manifestation of the Kura-Araxes phenomenon should be dated back at least to the last quarter of the 5th millennium BC. More importantly, since the early Kura-Araxes pottery from Ovçular Tepesi was found within the Late Chalcolithic habitat together with buff-coloured Chaff-Faced Ware, we make use of technological and functional evidence to argue that the coexistence of Kura-Araxes and Chaff-Faced vessels corresponds to a multicultural settlement pattern, which involves two human communities that interact at the regional level. We then compare this pattern with later examples of multiculturalism involving Kura-Araxes societies in the Kura and Euphrates basins, but also in Palestine.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaléorientSame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207