# r2-edh-b1-20

**Claim (as registered):** Monument-type documentation coverage (the share of rows carrying any recorded monument-type value at all) is highly heterogeneous rather than clustering: at least one eligible province lands under 30% coverage, AND at least one lands over 90%.

**Proposed mechanism:** Cataloguing depth for monument type is proposed to vary by province/collection history (a curatorial-resourcing property), not to cluster around a typical value.

**Scope:** Source: the Epigraphic Database Heidelberg (EDH), a catalogue of Roman-period inscriptions on stone/metal/etc. (physical objects, catalogued separately from a manuscript census). Training: the 33 provinces in the alphabetically first half of EDH's own province-code order (42,009 inscriptions). Holdout: the 33 provinces in the alphabetically second half, minus 'Provincia incerta' (EDH's own catch-all for uncertain findspots, not a real geographic unit, excluded from all arithmetic) -- 32 real provinces, 39,457 inscriptions -- landed in one complete fetch after the claim was fixed. EDH's own content has been fixed since 2021 (the cataloguing project's funding ended), so this holdout tests whether a pattern generalizes across an arbitrary alphabetical split of already-catalogued, unchanging material, not whether it predicts new discoveries. Minimum support: at least 100 rows in a province.

**Training-side evidence:** Low end: two training provinces under 24% coverage (23.65%, 19.92%). High end: several training provinces above 89% coverage, one reaching 97.92%.

**Holdout test and outcome:** Of 27 eligible holdout provinces: low end 13.16%, high end 93.01%.

**Status:** Survived (both extremes reproduced in the holdout).
