---
conjecture: r2-edh-b1-11
family: grok
model: "Grok 4.5 expert (chat paste-back via orchestrator window)"
received: 2026-08-06
template: PROMPT_TEMPLATE_v1.md sha256 4344aabfacfe88362c56d89b6c89d594a7bf3a221e18a16b0e351482447e512f
rivals_parsed: 2
note: "r2 (general construction volume, not military status) computable via internal proxy (building-inscription share); resonates with the pinning pass's own finding that non-frontier Aquitania/Aegyptus run ~19%."
---

{
"rivals": [
{
"mechanism": "High shares of stamped instrumentum domesticum reflect modern recovery and cataloguing priorities that systematically record bricks, tiles, and pipes in regions with active archaeological projects or museums specializing in such finds, rather than a concentration of ancient legionary production along militarized frontiers.",
"why_it_explains_the_same_evidence": "If cataloguing intensity for instrumentum varies by modern project rather than by ancient military presence, the training Rhine provinces and some non-frontier provinces can both reach ~19%, and one of the two named upper-Danube provinces can reach 17.28% simply because that province received more thorough instrumentum recording; the claim's survival then tracks modern practice, not frontier production.",
"named_confounds": ["selection effects in what got catalogued", "cataloguing or data-entry practice for instrumentum", "modern archaeological project intensity"],
"discriminating_test": {
"description": "Compare EDH instrumentum shares against independent tallies of stamped bricks/tiles/pipes from regional archaeological reports or museum inventories for the same provinces; measure whether high EDH shares correspond to provinces with known intensive modern recording of instrumentum rather than to military-frontier status.",
"computable_on_held_data": false,
"what_result_favors_rival": "If high instrumentum shares track modern project or museum activity more closely than frontier location, and some non-frontier provinces with intensive recording exceed 10% while some frontier provinces without it fall short, this favors the rival; if shares remain tightly linked to military-frontier status even after controlling for modern recording intensity, this favors the proposed legionary-production mechanism."
}
},
{
"mechanism": "Stamped portable objects occur at elevated rates in any province that experienced large-scale Roman construction (urban, villa, or military), so both certain frontier and certain non-frontier provinces reach the 10% threshold; the upper-Danube success is therefore explained by general building activity rather than specifically by legionary frontier production.",
"why_it_explains_the_same_evidence": "A link to overall construction volume rather than military status alone accounts for the training pattern (high shares on the Rhine and also in some non-frontier provinces) and for one of the two named holdout provinces clearing 10% while the other did not; the frontier-specific prediction is unnecessary.",
"named_confounds": ["selection effects tied to scale of Roman construction", "survival or recovery of building materials", "unit-of-count effect from provinces with major building programs"],
"discriminating_test": {
"description": "Proxy overall Roman construction intensity (for example, by counts of urban sites, villa density, or total non-instrumentum monumental inscriptions) for frontier and non-frontier provinces; test whether instrumentum share correlates more strongly with that construction proxy than with military-frontier classification.",
"computable_on_held_data": true,
"what_result_favors_rival": "If instrumentum share is predicted better by a general construction proxy than by frontier status, and non-frontier high-construction provinces also exceed 10%, this favors the rival; if frontier status remains the stronger predictor after controlling for construction volume, this favors the proposed legionary-frontier mechanism."
}
}
],
"no_viable_rival": false,
"notes": ""
}
