Bibliographic record
Abstract
Green glazed pottery was the finest ceramic product fired in Japan from the 9th to 11th centuries during the Heian period. The kilns that produced green glazed pottery were concentrated in Yamashiro and Tamba (near the capital of the Heian period), Omi to the east of Yamashiro, and the Tokai region further east of Omi. In 1994, the author considered the nature of green glazed pottery production in Omi. However, it has been a quarter of a century since the publication of that paper and the amount of important research has significantly increased since then. The discovery of new kilns and excavations in Koka city are particularly noteworthy. In this paper, I reviewed these recent achievements and undertook a basic consideration of green glaze pottery in Omi. First, I classified the petal-like decoration on the rim and body and the cross-section type of the base, in addition to the bowl types prominently seen in Omi green glazed ware. Next, based on these classifications, I reexamined newly discovered kilns and clarified the transition to the production of green glazed ware. In addition, I estimated the dates of products by verifying materials excavated from consumption sites. As a result, I concluded that the green glazed pottery production of Omi had many similar features to that of the Tokai region and had occasional relationships with Tamba, but it was not until the latter half of the 10th century that the uniqueness of Omi products became pronounced.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.009 |
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".