Research Methods for Classification and Identification of Ancient Glass Types
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ancient glass is susceptible to the influence of the environment of the burial site and then produce weathering, weathering will lead to changes in the proportion of its color and chemical composition, this paper analyzes the data of high-potassium glass and lead-barium glass, research on the weathering law of the glass artifacts, and classify and identify the type of glass. In order to classify the types of glass, this paper determines the best ccp_alpha of CART algorithm is located at [0,0.39296057] by cost pruning method, reduces the impurity of the classified tree to 0, and finds that the main difference between the classification of high-potassium glass and lead-barium glass lies in the content of PbO. The chemical compositions of different glasses are subclassified by K-means, and the number of nests of subclassified high-potassium glass and lead-barium glass is determined to be 4 and3 respectively with the help of SSE coefficients and profile coefficients, and the detailed subclassification is realized by CART algorithm. On the basis of the above, the prediction accuracy of Al-A8 glass types was accomplished by the perceptual machine model with 100% accuracy, and the results showed that the model stability and accuracy were high.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it