Il laterizio nei cantieri della Puglia centro-settentrionale tardoantica e medievale tra reimpieghi e nuove costruzioni
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The brick in late antique and medieval central and northern Apulia between reuse and new productions In Roman times, in central and northern Apulia, the use of clay in construction was not intensive, but reserved for specific functions. Production seems to be concentrated in the internal areas and linked to the major urban and rural settlements. The crisis in the sector takes place in the Late Antiquity, with different times among the various sites; in the towns production stopped between the 3rd and 4th centuries AD, except for Canosa, where in the 5th and 6th centuries an exceptional manufacturing of bricks for the building, managed by the Church, flourishes. In some rural contexts workshops of specific clay artefacts are also activated in the restructuring phases between the 4th and 5th centuries AD, to integrate reused bricks and tiles. With the exception of Faragola, production seems to have stopped in the early Middle Ages. In the advanced 11th and in 12th century when tiles reappear in the stratigraphies, but perhaps also new constructions employ bricks (Serracapriola), the manufacturing restarted. From the 13th century the use of newly made terracotta elements becomes more evident in various contexts, culminating in the construction of the Lucera fortress, undertaken by the Angevin rulers in the last quarter of the century, built largely with modular bricks, molded in the workshops planted on site and in the surrounding area. The elaboration of a mensiochronological curve of bricks for Lucera from the 14th to the 19th century made it possible to outline interesting and peculiar dynamics of the brick industry over the long term.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".