BRONZE AGE CROSS-SHAPED STONE BEADS OF CENTRAL ASIA AND MIDDLE EAST (REVISITING THE DATING OF ZAMANBABA CULTURE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The excavations of the Zamanbaba cemetery (belonging to the culture of the same name) in the ancient delta of the Zeravshan river (Bronze Age, South Uzbekistan) yielded 10 cross-shaped stone beads. The author of this paper thinks that the center for the production of such beads ap- peared in Northwestern Afghanistan at the end of the first quarter of the III mil. BC, after which they found their way to the south of Afghanistan (Mundigak) and to Southwestern Tajikistan (Farkhor). No items of this type are known to have been found in the regions lying to the south and southeast of Mundigak, while in the western (Tepe Hissar) and southwestern (Susa) regions of Middle East they and their replicas are represented by single finds only. They were mainly exported to the northwestern (Altyn-depe, Ulug-depe, Khapuz-depe, Parkhai II), northern (Za- manbaba) and northeastern (Farkhor) regions of Central Asia. Single beads could reach (probably, through multistage exchange) very distant lands, as is evidenced by the finds of analogous artifacts at the Sopka-2/4A cemetery in Southwestern Siberia, which can possibly be dated to the second quarter of the III mil. BC. The period of existence of cross-shaped stone beads in Central Asia embraces a long span of time from the end of the first quarter of the III mil. BC to the end of the first quarter of the II mil. BC. Therefore they cannot help to narrow the date of Zamanbaba culture.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".