MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Heracles and Melqart

2021· book-chapter· en· W3185909870 on OpenAlexaff
Megan Daniels

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClassical Antiquity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter explores the interrelationships between the Greek Heracles and Phoenician Melqart in cult, myth, and iconography from the Iron Age to Roman period. It articulates these connections not as a simple one-to-one equation of Heracles and Melqart, but rather views the long-term syncretism of these god-heroes as representative of the shared ideologies and cultural mentalities that emerged from human interactions and endeavors around the Mediterranean world in the first millennium BC. As such, a major focus of this chapter is the equivocal statuses that Heracles and Melqart inhabit between mortality and immortality, a status of particular concern for Greek and Roman authors in their portrayal of Heracles, and reflected also in cultic practices surrounding these figures in terms of their death and apotheosis. This status held particular significance for Heracles’ and Melqart’s roles in human affairs as divinized royal ancestors and colonizers par excellence, roles arguably expressed through their bellicose and leonine iconography. Examining the intersections between Heracles and Melqart thus reveals a great deal about human enterprises in the Mediterranean from the Iron Age to the Roman period.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.014
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicClassical Antiquity StudiesFrench-language works237,207