MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389636438 · doi:10.1086/727261

A Possible Amphora Second at Sikyon, Greece

2023· article· en· W4389636438 on OpenAlex
Scott Gallimore

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Archaeology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Mediterranean Archaeology and History
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmphoraPotteryContext (archaeology)ArchaeologyHistoryAncient historyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the role of quality control during the manufacturing process of Roman pottery. The criteria used by ancient potters to determine whether a finished vessel was suitable for sale and use or instead should be discarded as a waster has seen limited attention. Additional focus on this topic provides a means of studying behaviors associated with ancient pottery production and decision-making behind different steps of the process. Of particular interest for addressing the topic is a locally manufactured amphora recovered at the site of Sikyon, Greece, from a late fourth- to early fifth-century CE destruction deposit. This amphora was recovered from a use context but has several evident production defects and an X-shaped graffito incised on one of the handles, and it may have been designated as a second in antiquity. Along with a detailed analysis of the amphora, the discussion examines available archaeological, epigraphic, and paleographic evidence for quality control in Roman pottery production and attempts to shed additional light on potential ancient practices of designating vessels as seconds.1

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.209 · 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