Jánosi, P. 2006. Die Gräberwelt der Pyramidenzeit. - Mainz am Rhein, Verlag Philipp von Zabern
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Origin of the mastaba (p. 3). The concept of the Old Kingdom tomb as a subterranean ‘living’ quarter with the cult quarter as superstructure is rooted in the 2nd Dynasty; 2. Tombs in the 3rd Dynasty (p. 15). The emphasis here is on Saqqara. Both royal and private burial practices are treated here side by side. Twin mastabas are the new feature here; 3. 4th Dynasty Necropoleis (p. 33). On tombs in Meidum and Dahshur, but mainly Giza; centralized planning of the mastaba cemeteries is the main characteristic here; 4. Rock tombs in Dynasty 4 (p. 66). The Giza rock tombs are singled out and their parallels and differences with mastabas discussed. The culmination is the huge tomb of Queen Khentkaus; 5. 5th Dynasty tombs (p. 79). The individual factor became more important vis-a-vis the centralised royal influence, as opposed to the previous period. The tomb structures become increasingly complicated, like the complex of Rawer in Giza. Courts and statue rooms are an important element now; 6. Rock tombs of the 5th and 6th Dynasties (p. 120). Rock tombs in provincial necropoleis all the way to Aswan dictate the developments now, mirroring the political theatre. Read more...
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.015 |
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".