Implantation et occupation des espaces funéraires au second âge du Fer en Picardie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is based on the analysis of 73 burial sites spread out over the northwestern quarter of France, dating from the Aisne-Marne II A (La Tène A1) to the La Tène D2 periods. The methodological approach aims to characterize the La Tène burial areas and their evolution in Picardy. To this end, we drew up an analytical grid which takes into account, in the first place, criteria related to the geographical situation (plateau, valley, plain and coastal region), to topographical features (terrace, side, edge, shelf and hill), but also to the human environment (attached to or in close proximity to a dwelling zone, a mound or tumulus) ; and, in the second place, criteria related to the morphology, the organization and the evolution of the burial area itself. These areas may be open, or delimited by boundaries such as paths or enclosures ; they may be attached to a settlement, or not. The burials may be isolated, or form groups, or nuclei ; they may be distributed in lines or scattered at random with no apparent organization. In certain cases, we may note the existence of structuring factors such as pre-existing tumuli, contemporary or slightly earlier aristocratic burials, empty spaces. As concerns the evolution of the site, it may be traced in the number of stages and in the growth of the cemetery, with either a densification on the spot, or an expansion, or a shift to another zone. The study of these parameters enables us to define certain groups of sites and to highlight certain differences in the options adopted according to time and space. The aim is to understand the general evolution of the social structuring, and to highlight the choices governing the installation and management of the funerary space during the La Tène period.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".