MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973685391 · doi:10.3764/aja.123.4.0589

An Island in Crisis? Reconsidering the Formation of Roman Crete

2019· article· en· W2973685391 on OpenAlexaff
Scott Gallimore

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Archaeology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClassical Antiquity Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCONQUESTPaceArgument (complex analysis)GlobalizationHistoryEmpireInvestment (military)EconomyGeographyEconomic historyAncient historyDevelopment economicsPolitical scienceEconomic geographyEconomicsLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper critically assesses the transformation of material culture assemblages on Crete between its conquest by Rome in 69–67 B.C.E. and the mid first century C.E. by first applying the frameworks of eventful archaeology and globalization. These paradigms demonstrate that the conquest, despite being an important historical event, was not the primary impetus behind transformation of material culture assemblages but instead served as a preliminary step for gradual transition that varied in pace across Crete. Previous analyses have highlighted the mid first century C.E. as the point when transformation becomes evident even at sites resistant to change up to that point. An explanation of the specific factors that led to this situation, however, is lacking. Building on an argument tied to globalization that investment is a key variable behind gradual transformation, this paper examines economic developments on Crete before and after Rome's conquest—including infrastructure expansion, increase in agricultural output, and the growth of social and economic networks—that permitted increased connectivity with other regions of the Roman empire. These developments, which led to intensification of economic contacts by the mid first century C.E., particularly with Italy, provided a conduit for transformation to reach all sectors of the island.

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)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.016
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of ArchaeologySame topicClassical Antiquity StudiesFrench-language works237,207