NEW RESULTS CONCERNING THE BARROWS OF THE MONTEORU CULTURE AT BÂRSEȘTI, IN THE CURVATURE SUBCARPATHIANS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Near a late Hallstattian barrow group that S. Morintz excavated in 1957, the barrow 19, which he thought had been built in the same period, probably covered two Monteoru cremation graves. At the new excavations of 2016–2017 on the Dumbravă plateau near the village of Bârsești, a group of four Bronze Age barrows (nos. 39–42) belonging to the Monteoru culture was investigated. As the features of the recently‑excavated tumuli showed, barrow 19 was probably built in the Middle Bronze Age as well. The two graves belong to the phase Ic2 of the Monteoru culture and are dated to the first quarter of the second millennium BC. The young adults were cremated immediately postmortem at a relatively low temperature (500–800°C), and only some of the incineration remains were put in the graves. Cremation graves underneath the barrow were found in the tumulus 42 from the Monteoru Ic2 phase. The mound was built of earth and stabilized by a stone circle and covered by stones. The barrow had central ritual pits filled with stones and was in use for more than two centuries. The barrow 41 was a complex ensemble built upon various small mounds with cremation graves and offering pits; it was used as a funeral area in the phases Monteoru Ia/IIa and IIb for nearly two centuries. The barrows 39 and 40 of the Monteoru IIb phase were not built for cremation graves but were used as a symbolically‑submitted inventory of the deceased persons.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".