---
conjecture: r2-edh-b1-23
family: codex
model: "gpt-5.6-sol (codex-cli 0.144.0-alpha.4, ChatGPT-subscription auth)"
model_stamp_corrected: "2026-08-07 — archives were first written stamped gpt-5.5 by a runner bug (the stamper read config.toml's default instead of the -m flag actually passed). The calls themselves ran on gpt-5.6-sol throughout; only the label was wrong. Corrected in place, noted here rather than silently."
received: 2026-08-07
template: PROMPT_TEMPLATE_v1.md sha256 4344aabfacfe88362c56d89b6c89d594a7bf3a221e18a16b0e351482447e512f
rivals_parsed: 3
validation: VALID
---

{
  "rivals": [
    {
      "mechanism": "The elevated shares arise from regional cataloguing conventions: contributors working from northern-Italian corpora classify generic upright slabs or fragmentary funerary stones as stelae more readily than contributors covering other provinces.",
      "why_it_explains_the_same_evidence": "Aemilia and neighboring Transpadana could inherit similar terminology from overlapping scholarly institutions, publication series, or EDH ingestion workflows. That would elevate the recorded stele share in both provinces without requiring a distinct ancient funerary tradition.",
      "named_confounds": [
        "regional monument-type coding convention",
        "source-publication or import-batch effect",
        "differential classification of fragmentary stones"
      ],
      "discriminating_test": {
        "description": "Group records by bibliography, contributing corpus, editor, or import batch, and independently reclassify a blinded sample of object descriptions or images using one province-neutral coding rubric. Estimate whether the provincial excess persists within sources and after harmonized reclassification.",
        "computable_on_held_data": true,
        "what_result_favors_rival": "The excess is concentrated in particular northern-Italian sources or editors and substantially shrinks after uniform reclassification; the regional-tradition mechanism instead predicts elevated shares across independent sources under the common rubric."
      }
    },
    {
      "mechanism": "The EDH samples for Aemilia and Transpadana are disproportionately drawn from necropoleis or funerary-focused corpora, where stelae are intrinsically common, rather than representing each province's overall monument repertoire.",
      "why_it_explains_the_same_evidence": "If both provincial catalogues contain unusually many epitaphs or a few heavily harvested cemetery assemblages, their aggregate stele shares can be high even when people in those regions were no more likely than comparable Romans elsewhere to choose stelae for a given funerary context.",
      "named_confounds": [
        "funerary-versus-nonfunerary denominator composition",
        "site-level clustering",
        "selective cataloguing of necropolis assemblages",
        "unequal weighting of excavation corpora"
      ],
      "discriminating_test": {
        "description": "Identify inscription function and findspot or excavation corpus, then compare stele choice only among funerary monuments while weighting sites equally and repeating the calculation after removing each large cemetery corpus. Fit a model predicting stele status from province after controlling for function and site or corpus.",
        "computable_on_held_data": true,
        "what_result_favors_rival": "The Aemilia and Transpadana excess disappears or becomes strongly dependent on one or two cemetery corpora after function standardization and equal site weighting; a province-wide tradition predicts a persistent excess across multiple independent funerary sites."
      }
    },
    {
      "mechanism": "Aemilia and Transpadana have similar chronological mixtures in the catalogue, with disproportionate representation of periods when stelae were widely more common, so their agreement reflects time-period composition rather than a specifically Cisalpine tradition.",
      "why_it_explains_the_same_evidence": "The two provinces can both show elevated aggregate shares if their dated, monument-typed records cluster in the same stele-rich centuries. The observed proportions alone do not establish that the elevation persists within comparable periods.",
      "named_confounds": [
        "chronological composition",
        "differential dating completeness",
        "period-specific survival and recovery"
      ],
      "discriminating_test": {
        "description": "Bin dated monument-typed records by century or narrower archaeological period, estimate stele shares within each period, and directly standardize every province to a common period distribution. Include an explicit category for undated records and conduct sensitivity analyses for their possible dates.",
        "computable_on_held_data": true,
        "what_result_favors_rival": "The two provincial shares fall toward ordinary levels after chronological standardization and show no consistent within-period provincial excess; the regional-tradition mechanism predicts that Aemilia and Transpadana remain elevated relative to contemporaneous provinces."
      }
    }
  ],
  "no_viable_rival": false,
  "notes": ""
}
