Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human space is transformed into territory through multiple types of delineation, from closed limits materialised in the landscape (such as fortresses, barriers, etc.), to open and blurred limits forming transition areas, known and practised by actors. In the kind of territorial state which Egypt had been since its birth, it was essential for the rulers to spatially mark the limits of their sovereignty. During the New Kingdom, the economic and political integration of the border districts was made possible thanks to the khetem border posts and their administration. The aim was to ensure the integrity and security of the kingdom, by investing or even overinvesting in its periphery, in terms of political decision, discourse and representations. The king and his administration were well aware that the integrity of the state was at stake in these border zones. Yet, in spite of the uniformity of the discourse, and the fact that the same name was applied to all border posts around Egypt, as well as the same title to the person in charge of these settlements, it appears that the system adapted to and was intimately linked with the local situation and the specificities of each border region.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".