MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807770515 · doi:10.1038/s42004-018-0034-y

Absolute dating of lead carbonates in ancient cosmetics by radiocarbon

2018· article· en· W2807770515 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Chemistry · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Materials Analysis
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiocarbon datingCarbonateCosmeticsArchaeologyArchaeological scienceGeologyAccelerator mass spectrometryNatural (archaeology)ChemistryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Lead carbonate is one of the major compounds of art and archeology used as an ingredient in paint and cosmetics since Antiquity. Accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon dating is usually applied to organic remains. Here we extend radiocarbon dating to lead carbonate, an inorganic material. We demonstrate that lead carbonates can be dated. We also show that natural and manufactured make-up powders can be discriminated by radiocarbon. We find that cerussite used for cosmetics was a natural mineral during the Egyptian Kingdom and then a synthesized compound manufactured by the ancient Greeks. Furthermore, we confirm that phosgenite was artificially produced by the Egyptians about 3500 years ago. Our results confirm the expertize of ancient Egyptians and Greeks in the chemical synthesis of cosmetics. The detection of radiocarbon in lead carbonate holds great promise for art history and provides a new tool for the authentication of paintings by dating the lead white pigment.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.217 · 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