MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912080040 · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2019.02.001

Chronology of early Islamic glass compositions from Egypt

2019· article· en· W2912080040 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nadine Schibille, Bernard Gratuze, Éric Ollivier, Étienne Blondeau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Archaeological Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Materials Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Research CouncilEuropean Commission
KeywordsChronologyIslamArchaeologyNinthQuarter (Canadian coin)Period (music)GeologyHistoryAncient historyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compositional data of archaeological glasses offer an opportunity to trace the movement of materials in the ancient and medieval world. The lack of a comprehensive record of well-dated samples from Egypt, one of the major producers of glass throughout the first millennium CE, has limited the systematic application of a chronological and geographical model. Here, we report LA-ICP-MS results of Islamic glass weights and stamps from Egypt that provide a precise record of high temporal resolution of glass compositions from Abd al-Malik's monetary reform in 697 CE to the year 1020 CE. This period covers several radical changes in Islamic glassmaking. After a significant hiatus in the production of glass weights between the last quarter of the ninth and the middle of the tenth century we see the advent of novel glassmaking recipes based on the use of soda-rich plant ash. Our study establishes a temporal model that serves as a tool for dating archaeological glass assemblages, as well as a geographical model that allows for a clear classification of Levantine and Egyptian plant ash glasses.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.242
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

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 designObservational
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

Citations110
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Archaeological ScienceSame topicCultural Heritage Materials AnalysisFrench-language works237,207