MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399532899 · doi:10.1086/730184

Representations of Gender: Recognizing the Role of Feminine Sacrificial Attendants in the Column of Trajan Sacrifice Scenes

2024· article· en· W4399532899 on OpenAlex
Elizabeth Wolfram Thill, Maryl B. Gensheimer, Elizabeth M. Greene

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 · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicBalkans: History, Politics, Society
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersUniversity of OxfordUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsSacrificeColumn (typography)ArtPsychologyAestheticsHistoryMathematicsArchaeologyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article offers an analysis of the Feminine Sacrificial Attendant figure type on the Column of Trajan frieze in Rome. We first present a detailed study of the Column of Trajan examples, focusing on both composition and broader narrative context. We argue, based on this methodology, that the traditional identification of these figures as masculine must be abandoned, in favor of a more demonstrable identification as feminine. By analyzing these figures as materializations of a sacrificial role—that both referred to contemporary norms and participated in their construction—this article demonstrates that our feminine identification has wide implications beyond the frieze itself. In particular, this figure type broadens our understanding of the variety of players in the life of the Roman army and the rites of Roman state religion more generally.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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.309 · 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