MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6998767509

Archaeology within the Andalusian Thesaurus of the Historical Heritage (TAPH). Design, implementation and computerisation

2004· article· en· W6998767509 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArchaeology and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Aboriginal Peoples HealthUniversity of OxfordJunta de AndalucíaUniversity of SouthamptonUniversidad de Sevilla
KeywordsTerminologyDocumentationThesaurusVocabularyProcess (computing)Cultural heritage
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses the criteria and methodology applied for the insertion and later development of the archaeological terminology into the Andalusian Thesaurus of the Historical Heritage (TAPH), published in 1998. Firstly, the background and precedents that gave way to the creation of such documentation language are dealt with. Secondly, we comment upon the problems encountered in the integration of the archaeological vocabulary within a thesaurus that comprises several other heritage-related disciplines such as Architecture, Ethnology or Art History. Thirdly, the significance of the TAPH five years after its publication is evaluated, with a special emphasis in the process of its implementation and computerisation within the Information System of the Andalusian Historical Heritage.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.244 · 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