MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409094360 · doi:10.1145/3727623

<i>DeepHadad</i> : Enhancing Readability of Damaged Inscriptions with Synthetic Data

2025· article· en· W4409094360 on OpenAlexaff
Andrei C. Aioanei, Jonathan Klein, K. Klein, Régine Hunziker-Rodewald, Dominik L. Michels

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal on Computing and Cultural Heritage · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHandwritten Text Recognition Techniques
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersArab-German Young Academy of Sciences and Humanities
KeywordsReadabilityComputer scienceArchaeologyGeographyProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The deterioration of ancient inscriptions over centuries has resulted in irrevocable loss of vital written records, hampering epigraphic analysis, and creating significant gaps in historical knowledge. Factors such as eroded letters and physical damage often compromise the readability of these inscriptions. We present DeepHadad , a neural network trained on procedurally generated synthetic data that use displacement maps and image-to-image translation to digitally restore severely damaged ancient inscriptions to a more readable state. The network’s name is derived from the famous Panamuwa (I) inscription on the mid-8th century BCE Hadad statue, where, at certain places, only faint traces of letters remain on the damaged basalt statue. A key challenge in this work is the lack of well-preserved and damaged glyph pairs for training, as each glyph instance is unique and therefore not found in different states of erosion. We address this by generating synthetic training data through simulated erosion processes, enabling our neural network to successfully generalize to real data. By extracting and overlaying completion maps onto the 3D model, we significantly enhance the legibility of the barely recognizable Aramaic inscription on the Hadad statue. Quantitative and qualitative experiments confirm that our approach can recover textual content that would otherwise be lost or recoverable only through time-consuming manual work. This research opens a pioneering avenue for employing state-of-the-art AI to enrich the readability of ancient textual heritage. Our methodology facilitates a more comprehensive analysis of significant inscriptions and demonstrates the potential of AI-assistive technologies to advance the field of ancient restoration and epigraphic studies.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal on Computing and Cultural HeritageSame topicHandwritten Text Recognition TechniquesFrench-language works237,207