The Inscribed Metal Pots in the West of the Arab Gulf (Mleiha and Al- Fueda), Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt: A Comparative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study seeks to analyze some themes and ornaments that appeared on metal pots in the west of Arab Gulf (Mleiha in the United Arab Emirates and Al- Fueda in the Sultana of Oman). The study also makes a comparison between the metal pots of previous regions and their counterparts in Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt. The Arab Gulf is of great importance because it represents an important center for commercial convoys and associates with ancient civilizations in Mesopotamia, ancient Egypt and other civilizations. The Arab Gulf produced a varied and splendid art with artistic output. On the other hand, Mesopotamia transferred the ancient Egyptian artistic influences to the Arab Gulf. The study highlights the two regions of Mlieha and Al- Fueda in the west of the Arab Gulf, Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt. Also, it shows the artistic influences on these pots. To describe and analyze such metal pots, the study adopts the descriptive analytical approach. The researcher has faced several difficulties, which are: 1) Finding a few of inscribed metal pots led to the difficulty of the local comparison where some sites did not reveal a rich metal product. 2) The scarcity of references and books specialized in metal arts in the Arab library. 3) Numerous metal sculpture works have been lost due to re- using and re- shaping these metals again. The study has reached many conclusions, the most important of which are: 1) The pots and plates were decorated with splendid inscriptions and ornaments, and their themes were quoted from neighboring countries. 2) The Study has noted that some metal inscriptions represented the pure local environment of the art at the time. Also, some of them were affected by the arts of neighboring civilizations in Mesopotamia, Syria and ancient Egypt.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".