MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913300944 · doi:10.1002/gea.21725

Urban micromorphology: A microecological narrative of a Neopalatial neighborhood at Bronze Age Palaikastro, Crete

2019· article· en· W2913300944 on OpenAlexafffund
Rachel Kulick

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoarchaeology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersGerman Academic Exchange Service LondonSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBronze AgePeriod (music)ArchaeologyExcavationGeologyAridGeographyPaleontologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The new micromorphological evidence from the 2013–2015 Palace and Landscape at Palaikastro (PALAP) excavations (Crete, Greece) provides significant information on a new area of the Bronze Age urban center of Palaikastro and its surrounding environment—a microecological narrative. The evidence suggests that slope processes had a significant impact on the area of three newly excavated buildings during the Neopalatial period (1650/1640–1440/1430 B.C.). The findings indicate that phases of gradual sediment accumulation, associated with flooding and eolian deposition, occurred during the Middle Minoan III to Late Minoan IA periods; such phases may indicate active slope or landscape management (e.g., terracing). In contrast, periods of increased slope instability, possibly relating to abandonment phases, occurred in the Late Minoan IB period. Combined with other archaeological evidence, micromorphological observations suggest a local aridity event in Late Minoan IB, and this dry period may be connected to larger regional and Mediterranean climatic patterns.

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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoarchaeologySame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207