Coin Circulation in Cabyle During the Late Roman Period (Based on the Results from Archaeological Excavations in Sector V)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2014–2019, the excavations of Late Antique buildings in Sector V of the Archaeological Reserve “Thracian and Ancient City of Cabyle” were carried out. Although limited to 3 weeks per year, they provide sufficient information on the Late Antique structures. Two buildings have been recorded, together with their adjacent streets and water supply networks, dating from the first quarter of the 4th century to c. AD 376–378. The dating of the structures is based on the extensive numismatic material of more than 600 coins discovered during the excavations. Unfortunately, due to their poor preservation, half of them could not be identified. The present study concerns the remaining 336 coins, which allows for some observation and relevant conclusions. More than 30 coin types have been identified in the period from the end of the 3rd century to the reign of Emperor Valens (364–378). Three peaks in the accumulation of coins could be distinguished clearly. The first falls in the years AD 311–324, with the largest number of coins of Licinius. The second peak coincides with the last years of the reign of Constantine the Great until the early 340s. The last peak is associated with the coinage of the FEL TEMP REPARATIO type of Emperor Constantius II and his co-rulers between AD 348–358.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".