The Roman way: Investigating the cremation conditions during the Roman period in Belgium using a multi-proxy and multi-sampling approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assesses cremation conditions in the Roman period using a multi-proxy analysis (FTIR-ATR and carbon and oxygen isotope analysis) on 332 burned bones from five Belgian Gallo-Roman cemeteries. The results suggest similar pyre structure, size, temperature, and body positioning across Gallo-Roman cremations. However, high variability in δ 13 C and δ 18 O values indicates differences in fuel selection and environmental factors. The wide δ 13 C range likely reflects the use of multiple wood types (e.g., Quercus sp./oak, F. sylvatica/beech) and different tree parts (e.g., trunk, branch, stump) in pyre construction. In contrast, δ 18 O variation may relate to quenching methods and/or seasonal and weather conditions during combustion. Differences were also observed in cremation conditions between the Metal Ages and the Gallo-Roman cremations from Belgium, with Roman cremations presenting better oxygen availability during combustion. Finally, the Gallo-Roman cemetery of Fouches is particularly interesting, as it dates to the Early Roman period and presents similarities in ventilation conditions with the cemeteries from the Metal Ages instead of the other Gallo-Roman cemeteries. The evidence from Fouches suggests a gradual transition from the Metal Ages to Roman cremation practices. The dating of Fouches to the Early Roman period could potentially explain that Roman cremation expertise was not immediately widespread but rather transferred gradually to the edges of the Roman Empire.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| 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 it