MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403620083 · doi:10.3390/arts13060163

Lebanese Cedar, Skeuomorphs, Coffins, and Status in Ancient Egypt

2024· article· en· W4403620083 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline Arbuckle MacLeod

Bibliographic record

VenueArts · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Egypt and Archaeology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAncient historyTraditional medicineGeographyHistoryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In ancient Egypt, as with many cultures, funerary objects often communicated aspects of access, power, and social status. Lebanese cedar, for instance, was selected as a particularly desirable material from which to craft the coffins of Egypt’s upper echelons. This imported timber was both structurally superior to local woods and had important social and religious significance. For the slightly lower-ranking elite of Egypt, for whom cedar was inaccessible, local wood skeuomorphs that imitated cedar coffins were created in their place. The skeuomorphs enabled these individuals to demonstrate their knowledge of elite styles and tastes, and, due to the power of the image in ancient Egypt, also allowed for them to borrow the religious power of cedar wood to protect and enhance their own coffins. In this paper, a selection of Old to Middle Kingdom coffins are discussed to demonstrate the ways that cedar was emphasized as a construction material by the upper elite and mimicked by the middle and lower elite. This helps to demonstrate both the value of cedar in ancient Egypt, as well as the means by which imagery could be manipulated to gain access to the power of this potent material.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArtsSame topicAncient Egypt and ArchaeologyFrench-language works237,207