MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293226763 · doi:10.1387/veleia.23104

A Female Doctor (Medica) at Augusta Emerita (Mérida)? Re-examining CIL II 497 from Humanist Readings to the Latest Digital Epigraphy Techniques

2022· article· en· W4293226763 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueVeleia · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClassical Antiquity Studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersUniversidad de AlcaláSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMinisterio de Ciencia e Innovación
KeywordsEpigraphyAltarContext (archaeology)Critical editionClassicsScholarshipHistoryHumanismArtAncient historyHumanitiesArchaeologyTheologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides a critical re-examination of a funerary altar (CIL II 497) from Augusta Emerita (Mérida, Spain). It explores the strengths and weaknesses of all previous editions of the text from its first publication in 1633 to the present day, providing a critical review of the development of epigraphic scholarship on Mérida during this long period. Given the problems of all previous editions, including CIL II 497, it then re-examines the altar using traditional epigraphic methods alongside the latest digital techniques (especially Morphological Residual Modelling, M.R.M.) to provide a new edition of the text, while setting the presence of a female doctor at the provincial capital of Lusitania into the broader social context of medical practitioners in Rome’s western provinces.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.257 · 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