MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231896548 · doi:10.31235/osf.io/c8dwg

Tell me what you see: Late deposition of an atypical metallic artefact in Perdigões

2021· preprint· en· W4231896548 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ana Catarina Basílio, António Carlos Valera

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeological and Geological Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDitchParallelsTypologyQuarter (Canadian coin)Deposition (geology)Face (sociological concept)Element (criminal law)GeologyHistoryArchaeologyEngineeringPaleontologyPolitical scienceLinguisticsPhilosophyMechanical engineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents the deposition of a deformed metallic piece in the re-cutting of Ditch 7 in the Complex of Ditched enclosures of Perdigões. The filling of this reopening was done with the accumulation of a great set of stones, on top of which this elongated and serrated metal element of atypical typology was identified.This piece, due to the absence of direct parallels in the national territory, allows to discuss not only typological and terminological questions, in face of its formal distance from the Palmela Points/arrowheads or the tanged daggers. At the same time allows to think about its biography (presence of a serrated edge and distortion), contextual and chronological insertion, being noted a recurrence of certain types of late depositions in Perdigões, as is the case of this re-cutting in Ditch 7, dated from the third quarter of the 3rd millennium BC.

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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.195 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArchaeological and Geological StudiesFrench-language works237,207