MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tel Haẓor – 2014

2015· article· en· W4405818226 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amnon Ben-Tor, Sharon Zuckerman, Shlomit Bechar

Bibliographic record

VenueḤadašŵt ʾarkeyŵlŵgiyŵt. · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeological Research and Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcavationArchaeologyLicenseHebrewAdministration (probate law)Foundation (evidence)SupervisorHistoryAncient historyLawPolitical scienceClassics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the months of June and July 2014, the 25th season of the 'Selz Foundation Hazor Excavations in Memory of Yigael Yadin' (License No. G-17/2014) took place. These excavations are sponsored by the Philip and Muriel Berman Center for Biblical Archaeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and by the Israel Exploration Society. The 2014 expedition benefited from the financial assistance of the Selz Foundation (New York), the Edith and Reuben Hecht Fund (Israel) and individual donors. The 2014 excavation was directed by A. Ben-Tor and S. Zuckerman, who were assisted by S. Bechar (Area M4 north and south supervisor), N. Paz (Area M3 supervisor) and D. Weinblatt-Krause (Area A9 supervisor), as well as M. Bekker (registration), I. Strand (surveying and drafting), M. Cimadevilla (field photography), I. Strand and O. Cohen (restoration) and S. Yadid and Y. Nemanov (administration). The expedition numbered some 30 participants from Canada, South Africa, the U.S.A., Europe, New Zealand and Israel. The excavation, within the Tel Hazor National Park, was conducted with the full cooperation of the National Parks Authority. The expedition members lodged at Kibbutz Gonen.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2110.072

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueḤadašŵt ʾarkeyŵlŵgiyŵt.Same topicArchaeological Research and ProtectionFrench-language works237,207