MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296008373 · doi:10.3138/mous.18.3.02

Provincializing Roman Dacia: The Canadian–Romanian Apulum Roman Villa Project, 2018–2019

2022· article· en· W4296008373 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Matthew M. McCarty, Mariana Egri, Aurel Rustoiu, Andreea Drăgan, Alex Turner, Alexandru Popa

Bibliographic record

VenueMouseion Journal of the Classical Association of Canada · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Mediterranean Archaeology and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcavationArchaeologyRomanianGeographyEliteConsumption (sociology)Ancient historyHistoryArtPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Apulum Roman Villa Project (ARVP) examines the “provincialization” and “de-provincialization” of Roman Dacia through the archaeological micro-history of a villa site at Oarda-Bulza, just outside one of the provincial capitals at Apulum. As one of the first villas in Dacia to be excavated scientifically and from multidisciplinary perspectives, the site promises to shed new light on the interplays among forms of production, cultural consumption, community formation, and incorporation into a host of new imperial networks (economic, military, and social). Aerial, geophysical, and pedestrian surveys undertaken in 2018 allowed identification of four major buildings within an enclosure: an elite residential structure; a productive zone that also seems to have housed its own community; and two storage buildings. Additionally, traces of Early and Late Iron Age occupation have been identified on site. The surveys also point to the ongoing potential of the site for future excavations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.000
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMouseion Journal of the Classical Association of CanadaSame topicAncient Mediterranean Archaeology and HistoryFrench-language works237,207