MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6906414981 · doi:10.17613/g4pv6-nh307

Quantitative Data, Hypothesis Testing, and Archaeological Narratives: Was there really a Greek Dark Age?

2020· other· en· W6906414981 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University) · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBronze AgeIron AgeConstruct (python library)Period (music)Poverty

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper assesses the increasingly common view that the Greek "Dark Age" is a scholarly construct by determining whether the rate of discovery of Early Iron Age sites has increased since the discovery of Lefkandi around 1980. I present a database of over 4,000 Late Bronze Age and Protogeometric sites discovered between 1900 and 2010. If Early Iron Age sites were being systematically ignored in the early 20th century, but treated fairly in the last few decades, we would expect the annual rate of Protogeometric site discovery to increase after 1980 in a way that diverges from the rate of discovery of Bronze Age sites. However, the data show that the rates of discovery for the two periods normalize very well, to roughly 1:1 over the whole data set. This data suggests that the poverty of the Early Iron Age cannot be explained as the result of scholars ignoring the evidence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University)French-language works237,207