Производство и разпространение на имитативни монети от типа "Две младежки глави/ орел върху делфин" на град Истрос през елинистическата епоха в Североизточна Тракия
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Of the city coins, the silver issues of Istros were the most widespread in Northeastern Thrace during the Hellenistic era. The Thracians also used their imitations made of silver, bronze, and lead. Among the silver imitations, there is a fourré (subaeratus) (Figs. 1–3). It is possible that, through the issue to which it belonged, substandard coins were distributed outside Istros in the second half of the 4th century BC. The bronze imitations (Figs. 4–8), most of which were found in the Thracian city in Sboryanovo Archaeological Reserve (Helis?), were produced there between the last quarter of the 4th century BC and mid-3rd century BC. It is assumed that they were crisis coins, replacing the Istros drachms in the local circulation, or that they were used to compensate for some shortage of low-value coins for everyday needs. The lead imitations (Figs. 9–12) were found in Razgrad District. They seem to have had a monetary function because they are of three denominations. In Northeastern Thrace, lead coins having as their prototype coins from various times and issuers were produced by Thracians or Celts. The ceramic tools (Figs. 13–14) were found in a Hellenistic settlement in the Cheshmite locality near the village of Voynovo, Silistra District. One of these is designed for making poansons. By means of the other one, negative images could be imprinted in clay molds. Modern-day cast bronze imitations (Figs. 15–17) are coin-shaped objects made at the end of the 19th century or the earliest years of the 20th century.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.013 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".