Clash of cultures? the Romano-British period in the West Midlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"The general perception of the west midlands region in the Roman period is that it was a backwater compared to the militarised frontier zone of the north, or the south of Britain where Roman culture took root early - in cities like Colchester, London and St Albans - and lingered late at cities like Cirencester and Bath with their rich, late Roman villa culture. The west midlands region captures the transition between these two areas of the 'military' north and 'civilised' south. Where it differed, and why, are important questions in understanding the regional diversity of Roman Britain. They are addressed by this volume which details the archaeology of the Roman period for each of the modern counties of the region, written by local experts who are or have been responsible for the management and exploration of their respective counties. These are placed alongside more thematic takes on elements of Roman culture, including the Roman Army, pottery, coins and religion. Lastly, an overview is taken of the important transitional period of the fifth and sixth centuries. Each paper provides both a developed review of the existing state of knowledge and understanding of the key characteristics of the subject area and details a set of research objectives for the future, immediate and long-term, that will contribute to our evolving understanding of Roman Britain. This is the third volume in a series - The Making of the West Midlands - that explores the archaeology of the English west midlands region from the Lower Palaeolithic onwards."--Back cover
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".