MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ахеменидская цилиндрическая печать из Косики

2020· article· en· W3110903026 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchaeological News · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Near East History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeal (emblem)Ancient historyMesopotamiaContext (archaeology)HEROQuarter (Canadian coin)ArchaeologyFellHistoryGeographyArtCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is devoted to the Achaemenid cylinder seal, representing a fight of the Persian hero with two lions, from the princely burial in Kosika in the Lower Volga region dated to the third quarter of the 1st century BC. The analysis has shown that the seal is dated to the 5th century BC, more likely to its first half. There is a good chance that it could be carved in a peripheral workshop in Mesopotamia or in Syria. The seal, made of a high quality-material at the high level, represents a complicated and in certain aspects very rare composition, clearly standing out in the context of the Achaemenid glyptics. At least 400 years passed between the time the seal had been carved and its use as part of the burial inventory in Kosika. It is hardly to suggest that the seal belonged to nomads all this time, especially since the finds of the Achaemenid seals in the nomadic burials in Eurasia of the 5th–4th centuries BC are extremely rare, unlike their finds in the necropoleis of the Bosporan Kingdom. The Achaemenid seal from Kosika along with a Kassite cylinder seal found in the same burial belongs to the circle of the Western Asian and Near Eastern seals of the mid-2nd — mid-1st millennium BC which were found also in the burials of Sarmatian elite of the 1st century BC — early 2nd century AD in the Bug, the Don and the Kuban regions. They probably fell into the hands of the nomads during robbery of sanctuaries at Transcaucasia.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.011

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.129 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchaeological NewsSame topicAncient Near East HistoryFrench-language works237,207