---
conjecture: r2-edh-b1-13
family: codex
model: "gpt-5.5 (codex-cli 0.144.0-alpha.4, ChatGPT-subscription auth)"
received: 2026-08-07
template: PROMPT_TEMPLATE_v1.md sha256 4344aabfacfe88362c56d89b6c89d594a7bf3a221e18a16b0e351482447e512f
rivals_parsed: 3
validation: VALID
---

{
  "rivals": [
    {
      "mechanism": "EDH's regional input streams may have encoded different source traditions: western provinces were populated mainly from Latin-focused epigraphic corpora, while eastern provinces drew more from Greek or bilingual epigraphic traditions. The observed split would then reflect catalogue construction and source coverage rather than the ancient linguistic boundary itself.",
      "why_it_explains_the_same_evidence": "Because source traditions are geographically clustered, the same low western and higher eastern non-Latin shares would appear in both the alphabetically first training provinces and the alphabetically second holdout provinces. The alphabetical split would not break the artifact if the underlying cataloguing pipelines vary by region rather than by alphabet.",
      "named_confounds": [
        "source-bibliography coverage bias",
        "language-dependent inclusion practice",
        "regional data-entry practice"
      ],
      "discriminating_test": {
        "description": "Stratify EDH records by bibliography, source corpus, contributor, or import batch where available, then estimate province-group effects within the same source strata. Measure whether Latin-West versus Greek-East still predicts non-Latin share after conditioning on catalogue source provenance.",
        "computable_on_held_data": true,
        "what_result_favors_rival": "The regional threshold pattern weakens or disappears within shared source strata, while source provenance strongly predicts language share."
      }
    },
    {
      "mechanism": "The result may be driven by object-type and context mix rather than province-level language ecology: eastern provincial records may contain more civic, honorific, funerary, or urban inscriptions where Greek/bilingual formulae are common, while western records may contain more military, administrative, or Latin-standardized material. The causal driver would be what kinds of inscriptions were preserved and catalogued in each province.",
      "why_it_explains_the_same_evidence": "If inscription genres and find contexts are regionally patterned, both training and holdout provinces would reproduce the same language-share contrast even without invoking a broad linguistic-cultural boundary. The Arabian near-low-end complication is also compatible with a different object/context mix within an eastern province.",
      "named_confounds": [
        "object-type composition effect",
        "find-context composition effect",
        "survival and preservation bias",
        "unit-of-count denominator effect"
      ],
      "discriminating_test": {
        "description": "Compute non-Latin shares separately within comparable inscription classes, such as funerary only, military only, votive only, honorific only, or urban civic contexts only. Compare whether the West/East threshold holds inside each class after excluding provinces with fewer than 30 records in that class.",
        "computable_on_held_data": true,
        "what_result_favors_rival": "The overall province split is largely explained by different class mixtures, and within matched inscription classes the Latin-West and Greek-East shares converge or fail the registered 5% separation."
      }
    },
    {
      "mechanism": "The administrative province labels may be acting as proxies for uneven inclusion of major Greek-speaking urban centers, coastal zones, and long-Hellenized cities rather than for a continuous empire-wide language boundary. A few dense urban epigraphic clusters inside eastern provinces could lift provincial non-Latin shares above 5%, while large rural or military hinterlands remain mostly Latin or locally variable.",
      "why_it_explains_the_same_evidence": "Training and holdout would both show the same province-level pattern if Greek-East provinces systematically contain catalogued high-volume Greek urban clusters and Latin-West provinces mostly do not. This explains the group outcome while shifting the cause from a provincial boundary to spatial clustering and aggregation inside provinces.",
      "named_confounds": [
        "administrative aggregation artifact",
        "urban-center overrepresentation",
        "spatial clustering of inscriptions",
        "province-level denominator effect"
      ],
      "discriminating_test": {
        "description": "Recompute language shares using sub-provincial spatial units, such as findspot grid cells, cities, or site-level clusters, and compare unweighted site-level medians with inscription-count-weighted provincial shares. Test whether Greek-East pass status depends on a small number of high-volume Greek-language sites.",
        "computable_on_held_data": true,
        "what_result_favors_rival": "Several Greek-East provinces fall below 5% when sites or grid cells are weighted equally, or their non-Latin share is dominated by a small number of urban clusters rather than broadly distributed across the province."
      }
    }
  ],
  "no_viable_rival": false,
  "notes": ""
}
