MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4284966798 · doi:10.4000/bifao.12872

Re-Membering Osiris: Late Period Casting Moulds and Osirian Ritual«إعادة تشكيل» أوزيريس: قوالب الصب في العصر المتأخر والطقوس الأوزيرية ؟

2022· article· ar· W4284966798 on OpenAlexaff
Georges Verly, Johannes Auenmüller, Luc Delvaux, Frederik W. Rademakers

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin de l Institut français d archéologie orientale · 2022
Typearticle
Languagear
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Egypt and Archaeology
Canadian institutionsRoyal British Columbia Museum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsirisExtant taxonBronzeArchaeologyCastingContext (archaeology)Assemblage (archaeology)Period (music)ArtAncient historyVisual artsHistoryAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1969, a unique set of Late Period bronze casting moulds was discovered at the Qubbet el-Hawa necropolis illustrating the chaîne opératoire of the lost-wax technique. Usually only mould fragments, if anything at all, remain in the archaeological record, but this assemblage presents complete examples representative of different phases of the production of solid-cast bronze artefacts. µCT scans of the moulds have revealed the existence of two entirely different technological approaches. The first is for the regular production of small amulets and statuettes of deities. The second is for attempts at “re-membering” Osiris figures. Previously cast and broken bronze feet are turned into the full form of an Osiris statuette by adding a body modeled in wax, and then placing the combination in a mould to cast a new image of the deity. Technologically, this particular method does not make sense, since a fusion of the newly cast body with the extant metal feet is impossible. This paper proposes a new hypothesis that seeks to explain this casting method in the context of a local ritual use.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin de l Institut français d archéologie orientaleSame topicAncient Egypt and ArchaeologyFrench-language works237,207