Mathematics, Administrative and Economic Activities in Ancient Worlds edited by Cécile Michel and Karine Chemla
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: Carlos Gonçalves Recently, we have been fortunate to see the start of a new research project, Mathematical Sciences in the Ancient World (the SAW Project), and the publication of a new book series, Why the Sciences of the Ancient World Matter. The SAW Project was funded by an advanced research grant from the European Research Council from 2011 to 2016, which had Karine Chemla as the principal investigator, together with Christine Proust and Agathe Keller, all researchers in the history of ancient mathematics of, respectively, China, Mesopotamia, and South Asia. The book series started in 2018 and it has been one of the most important vehicles to make public the extraordinary amount of material produced by the research project. How to cite: Gonçalves, C. rev. "Mathematics, Administrative and Economic Activities in Ancient Worlds" edited by Cécile Michel and Karine Chemla. Aestimatio: Sources and Studies in the History of Science (2023) 4: rev02 1–40. https://doi/10.33137/aestimatio.v4.43350.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.008 |
| 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 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".