MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ebusus y los monumenta romanos de las murallas renacentistas de Ibiza

2021· article· en· W3209003837 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMayurqa · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeological and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyQuarter (Canadian coin)TasteArtMiddle AgesThe RenaissanceRomanizationHumanitiesClassicsHistoryArt historyArchaeologyAncient historyPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last quarter of the 16th century, the final phase of the construction of the Renaissance walls of Ibiza took place. In its main entrance, known among other names as Puerta del Mar, as well as in its interior connection point with the Upper City (Dalt Vila), a total of five Roman monuments were placed, long attributed to a fortuitous discovery, in the course of the fortification works that, thanks to the good taste of their engineers, would have come to adorn the monumental access. At the same time, its connection with the Roman city of Ebusus was always taken for granted. But an exhaustive analysis of the bibliography and other historical documents demonstrates that such belief did not arise until more than two hundred and fifty years later, supplying with fantasy what was simply ignored. On the other hand, the verification that the portal of ses Taules obeyed a completely structured symbolic and ideological planning, together with the poverty of Roman sculptural findings in Ibiza, forces us to completely rethink this vision, in the sense that these Roman monuments may have no relationship with Ebusus.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMayurqaSame topicArchaeological and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207