MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132361855

Jelling - The Romanesque Stone Church

2023· article· en· W7132361855 on OpenAlexaff
Anne Pedersen, Per Kristian Madsen

Bibliographic record

VenueMinistry of Culture Research Portal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrescoDocumentationExcavationInterpretation (philosophy)MuralTufa
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnetometer surveys and resumed excavations in Jelling, Jutland, have indicated that the Viking-Age monuments, since 1994 a UNESCO World Heritage Site, were far more extensive that had previously been believed. The new discoveries also had implications for the interpretation of the central area of the complex between the two great mounds. This included the building sequence that had been identified beneath the Romanesque Stone Church. A building-archaeological investigation of the stone church and a new analysis of the early-medieval frescoes were therefore included in the research agenda of the National Museum's Jelling Project. Both initiatives involved digitisation of the data from previous investigations and underlined the potential of the old documentation of the church and its frescoes in the National Museum archives. Other studies focused on the use of calcareous tufa as a building material for churches and the transition from the use of wood to stone. In addition, the relationship between early medieval churches and ancient mounds of the past were examined, including the reuse of mounds as platforms for timber-built bell towers. The publication brings the results of the various projects together.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMinistry of Culture Research PortalSame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207