MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415769855 · doi:10.26650/anar.1587423

A Group of Alkaline Glazed Ceramics from the Mardin Museum

2025· article· tr· W4415769855 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Murat Tosun

Bibliographic record

VenueAnadolu Araştırmaları / Anatolian Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languagetr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Materials Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlazeFeature (linguistics)CeramicQuarter (Canadian coin)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates nine alkaline-glazed ceramics housed in the Mardin Museum, comprising four bottles, one pot, and four vases. The glaze characteristics of the bottles exhibit notable diversity: two feature a variegated greenish-blue glaze, one is double-glazed with a turquoise upper section and a dark blue lower section, comple mented by vertical dark blue stripes beneath the turquoise glaze, and one is dark green. In contrast, the pot and vases are uniformly characterized by a turquoise glaze. The alkaline glaze was applied to the outer surfaces of the ceramics and extended to the necks on the inside. However, it was not used for the inner surfaces or certain base sections of some specimens. Based on analogical research, the bottles classified under Type 1 are dated between the 3rd/2nd century BCE and the 3rd century CE (Seleucid/Parthian–Early Sasanian periods). Meanwhile, those under Types 1.2 and 1.3 span from the 3rd/2nd century BCE to the first quarter of the 3rd century CE (Seleucid/Parthian periods). The pot, classified as Type 2, is dated to the 2nd century BCE–2nd century CE. The vases, categorized under Type 3, are attributed to the 1st–2nd century CE.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnadolu Araştırmaları / Anatolian ResearchSame topicCultural Heritage Materials AnalysisFrench-language works237,207