Two Early Christian Decorated Sarcophagi From Rome In The Bible Lands Museum Of Jerusalem: Authenticity, Provenance, Dating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: The article aims at dispelling the repeatedly expressed assumption that two late Roman sarcophagi formerly in the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto and now in the Bible Lands Museum in Jerusalem are forgeries. It analyses their epigraphy and iconography based on autopsy of the monuments and assesses arguments brought forward in the scholarly controversy regarding the authenticity, provenance, and dating of the two coffins. Réesumé: L'article vise à infirmer l'hypothèse maintes fois formulée selon laquelle deux sarcophages de l'époque romaine tardive, qui se trouvaient autrefois au Musée royal de l'Ontario à Toronto, et qui se trouvent désormais au Musée des Terres de la Bible à Jérusalem, sont des faux. Il réalise une analyse épigraphique et iconographique de ces monuments par examen autoptique et évalue également les arguments avancés dans le débat scientifique concernant l'authenticité, la provenance, et la datation des deux cercueils.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".