Bibliographic record
Abstract
The excavations of Alanya castle started in 1985 in the form of surface surveys and then continued until 2008 in the form of authorised excavations. The second period of excavations took place between 2011 and 2012. Since 2013, the third period excavations have started and are still continuing. In this article, a brief evaluation of the third period excavations between 2013-2022 will be presented. The third period of excavations of Alanya Castle was carried out in the Shipyard Area, Inner Castle Palace, Inner Castle Church, Inner Castle Bath, Ehmedek Area, the section south of the city walls, the Arasta area and different sectors in the Tophane Quarter. In the shipyard area, excavation works were initiated in order to make the spaces in this area identifiable and understandable by increasing their visibility. During the excavations, the focus was especially on the spaces behind the first fortification wall on the seashore. It was found out that the three adjacent spaces opened towards the sea with an opening in front of each other and there were no openings facing in other directions. In addition, underwater documentation studies were also carried out in the shipyard area. In this context, an underwater structure with a rectangular plan, built of large block stones was identified between the Red Tower and the shipyard. Apart from these, other findings were made in this area for the city walls. Although the works in the palace in the inner castle were investigated in almost every period of the excavation of Alanya Castle, it is difficult to identify them since they were not properly reported. In the space to the east of the throne iwan of the palace, a plan element was found that spirals on the rock surface, forming a ramp and connecting to the cistern next to the iwan with a slope. Another excavation area in the palace was carried out in the rectangular space to the west of the palace. An expedition of the first period team carried out an excavation in the chapel located in the east of the citadel just at the entrance of the castle gate and it was revealed that the building had two different stages. Due to the disappearance of the graves around the chapel, traces of the first phase of the church were sought in the excavation of this area. The Inner Castle Bath, after passing through the opening on the south side of the city wall, there is a moulded wall that surrounds the area starting from the face of the portico feet facing the inner castle in the east and forms a mitered projection towards the inner castle when it turns towards the west. The tracing of the remains within the area enclosed by the wall revealed the existence of a bathhouse. Another part of the excavation consists of the Ehmedek area. The excavations carried out in the Triangular Bastion in the Ehmedek area revealed that the early bastion had two different phases and that the present triangular bastion was built on the ruins after the destruction of the bastion in the first phase. Many objects from the Seljuk and Ottoman Periods were unearthed during the excavations. Another excavation area of the city was the Arasta region. Arasta, which was apparently built in the 16th century during the Ottoman period, was destroyed by an earthquake a century later and turned into a cemetery. As a result of the excavation, the plan of Arasta was understood and its spaces were identified. For more detailed information, please refer to the Extended Abstract at the end of the text
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.009 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".