MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408298477 · doi:10.7146/bmg.v32i1.132456

Afdækning af fænomenet hørg fra yngre jernalder og vikingetid

2020· article· da· W4408298477 on OpenAlexaff
Lars Grundvad, Sofie Laurine Albris

Bibliographic record

VenueBy marsk og geest - Kulturhistorisk tidsskrift for Sydvestjylland · 2020
Typearticle
Languageda
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and language evolution
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I den tidlige vinter 2020 offentliggjorde Museet på Sønderskov fundet af en hal og enkarakteristisk stendynge på en mark øst for Harreby, som begge umiddelbart skal daterestil perioden yngre germansk jernalder til yngre vikingetid, her samlet perioden ca.600-975 e.Kr. (Grundvad et. al. 2020, s. 24 ff). Stedet for opdagelsen var – måske ikke heltuventet – marken, hvor den store guldskat ”Fæstedskatten” blev fundet i sommeren 2016og senere udgravet i december samme år (Grundvad 2017; fig. 1). Opdagelsen af disse anlægudgør det dateringsmæssigt yngste indslag i en række fortidsminder og fund, som tyderpå en århundredelang rituel brug af landskabet ved Fæsted-Harreby-Sønder Hygum.Sammen med en række stednavne sandsynliggør de, at dette område i jernalder og vikingetidfungerede som scene for sakrale handlinger; ofringer og deponeringer af varierendekarakter og af meget forskellige typer genstande. En landskabsmæssig brug, som påmange måder minder om det, der er dokumenteret arkæologisk ved Uppåkra i Skåne,Sorte Muld på Bornholm, Lejre ved Roskilde og ved Tissø på Vestsjælland. Undersøgelsernei Fæsted-Harreby-Sdr. Hygum er endnu i gang, men allerede står det klart, at detteområde tilfører helt nye perspektiver på udviklingen i det førkristne sakrale landskab.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1710.069

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBy marsk og geest - Kulturhistorisk tidsskrift for SydvestjyllandSame topicLinguistics and language evolutionFrench-language works237,207