MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The ditch No. 744 on “The Upper City” of Phanagoria

2018· article· en· W3214533839 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Завойкин А.А.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Mediterranean Archaeology and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDitchAcropolisArchaeologyDiggingQuarter (Canadian coin)StratigraphyStage (stratigraphy)Period (music)ExcavationTrenchGeologyHistoryAncient historyPaleontologyTectonicsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article is devoted to the chronological analysis of finds from the ditch (No. 744), found out inside of the trench “The Upper City” at Phanagoria in 2016. First of all, the ditch is interesting to that it is the latest constructions of the such sort, which were characteristic for this district of the city (acropolis) in the second half of the VI–V centuries BC. It is obvious that the such short-lived objects of utility purpose digging in the earth, couldn’t be simultaneous to land constructions (including public houses). Therefore it is possible to assume that generally they appear here during the periods after destruction of houses or on the eve of construction of new buildings. In some cases the thesis can be confirmed with a stratigraphy. The ditches of 470th years BC divided houses of the most ancient construction period (the 2nd half of VI – the first decades of the V centuries BC) and houses of the 2nd quarter – the middle of the V century BC. The ditch No. 744 was filled up at a boundary of the V–IV centuries BC or in the first years of the IV century BC. This dating probably marks the beginning of a new building stage on “The Upper City” in Phanagoria.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAncient Mediterranean Archaeology and HistoryFrench-language works237,207