Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This book offers a fresh insight into the conquests of Alexander the Great by attempting to view the events of 336–323 from the vantage point of the defeated. The extent, and form, of the resistance of those whose territories were invaded varied in accordance with previous relationships with either the Macedonian invader or the Achaemenids. The internal political situations of many states—particularly the Greek cities of Asia Minor—were also a factor. In the vast Persian Empire from the Aegean to the Indus, some states surrendered voluntarily, and others offered fierce resistance. Not all regions were subdued through military actions. Indeed, the excessive use of force on Alexander’s part is demonstrated as ineffective and counterproductive. This book examines the reasons for these varied responses, giving more emphasis to the defeated and less to the Conqueror and his Macedonians. In the process, it debunks many long-held views concerning Alexander’s motives. Such a study involves rigorous analysis of the ancient sources, and their testimony is presented throughout the book in the form of newly translated passages.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".