Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dorothy Menzel has been a researcher who has had profound impact on the study of the Wari state. Menzel’s conviction that art is not only a means to transmit ideas and values of a culture, but also can be deciphered to explain ancient cultural formations, enabled her to gain a broad understanding of the Wari state. Menzel paid special attention to ceramic associations, as well as to changes of pottery designs in order to trace a sequence of chronological significance. From the stylistic sequence she attempted to reconstruct the complex development process of Wari. Menzel divided the Middle Horizon Wari ceramics into four epochs (MH1, MH2, MH3, and MH4). On the basis of secure associations, Menzel also subdivided the first two epochs into MH1A and MH1B and MH2A and MH2B, anticipating at the same time making similar subdivisions for epochs three and four when more associations become available. Once the stylistic sequence was established, Menzel was well positioned to discuss the development of the Wari state and its expansion beyond its Ayacucho Valley heartland. Finally, this approach allowed her to make some suggestions with regard to the decline of Wari that culminated in the eventual abandonment of its capital city. This was certainly a unique and ambitious endeavor since no similar study existed. More importantly, perhaps, is that this stylistic sequence established more than five decades ago continues being used by researchers involved in Wari studies, a testament to the enormous importance of Menzel’s work.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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".