Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports the progress made in the computerization of the Athenian study, which compiles and studies data about the persons in ancient Athens.We irst summarize the issues and solutions on data storage since relational databases were applied in the study in the 1970s.We then detail the recent progress on the computerization of the project, which includes a method to digitize squeezes and an approach to develop an interactive map to facilitate the study of ancient Athens.The squeezes are paper impressions of ancient inscriptions.There is a high demand to digitize squeezes and make them freely available to humanities scholars worldwide.The proposed method generates bright digital images from low-relief ancient Greek characters on paper by convoluting 4 images of the same squeeze taken from different angles via the "Lazy Susan" platform.An interactive digital map of ancient Athens is highly helpful for the study, which visualizes the geographic information of ancient Athens and relates Athenians with their locations.The interactive map is developed based on the Lealet, which is free and open source.The progress reported in the paper will greatly promote the computerization of the Athenian study.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".