MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806010386 · doi:10.3968/10345

Weights and Measures Units in Petra Papyri

2018· article· en· W2806010386 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammed Al-Nasarat

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsByzantine architectureUnits of measurementMeasure (data warehouse)Period (music)HistoryClassicsLiteratureAncient historyComputer scienceArtAestheticsDatabasePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Petra papyri is one of the most important discovers in the history of ancient Jordan, and provide evidence that there were specified metrological units in Petra during the Byzantine period. The use of these weights and measurements was common in ancient Petra during the Byzantine period. So, this study will try to discuss various weight and measure units and measures of capacity dray and liquid that were practiced by the people in Petra and the modern equivalents of these weights and measures, although today it is difficult to define exactly how much certain these historic units measured, as compared to modern equivalents. Most of these measures were widely used and known by the eastern people even though they had variations in values. It seems that the people in Petra borrowed the measures technique from the Romans. This study will depend on the papyri of Petra and sources of the measures such as Epiphanius of Salamis.

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)0.003
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicArchaeology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207