MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763804827 · doi:10.1163/15685179-12341441

Caves of Dispute

2017· article· en· W2763804827 on OpenAlexaff
Kipp Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueDead Sea Discoveries · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsTrinity Western University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDead Sea ScrollsHebrew BibleBiblical studiesJewish studiesCaveHistoryFeature (linguistics)HebrewLiteratureClassicsArchaeologyArtPhilosophyLinguisticsJudaism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Over 30 fragments purportedly from the Dead Sea Scrolls belonging to two private collections were published for the first time in Summer 2016. Virtually all of these fragments in The Schøyen Collection and Museum of the Bible are non-provenanced apart from verbal guarantees made by their sellers. An unusual feature of these fragments is that almost all of them correspond to texts from the Hebrew Bible, but also to a few previously known compositions from antiquity. This paper examines the published fragments from both collections according to their observable physical properties, as well as palaeographical and scribal characteristics, and seeks to understand from these more about their potential origin—whether from antiquity or modern times.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.002
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDead Sea DiscoveriesSame topicArchaeology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207