AI system
- System
-
Groningen AI-based writer-identification pipeline (neural-network binarisation with textural and allographic feature analysis)
- Model
-
BiNet.
- Release
-
Exact release not established.
- Application developer
-
University of Groningen (Dhali, Schomaker, Popović) - Role
-
The software analyzed handwriting features and separated the columns into two groups.
- Configuration
-
Not assessed
- Inputs and outputs
-
Not assessed
- Autonomy
-
Not assessed
- Workflow
-
High-resolution digital images of all 54 columns. Neural-network separation of ink from background. Textural and allographic features compared statistically across column groups.
- Human oversight
-
Not assessed
- Relation to AI
-
The AI analysis produced the statistical separation of the columns into two groups. The scribal interpretation and the conclusion that two scribes were responsible were made by the authors. The method's developers and the finding's authors are the same team. The only non-developer cited source is the University of Groningen's statement as carried by phys.org. Independent coverage (Smithsonian, CNN) is not among the sources.
- AI contribution
-
The AI analysis produced the statistical separation of the columns into two groups. The scribal interpretation and the conclusion that two scribes were responsible were made by the authors. The method's developers and the finding's authors are the same team. The only non-developer cited source is the University of Groningen's statement as carried by phys.org. Independent coverage (Smithsonian, CNN) is not among the sources.
Benefits
- Outcome identifiers
-
Not assessed
- Benefit
-
two scribes wrote the Great Isaiah Scroll, switching at columns 27–29
- Category
-
Improved Knowledge Discovery
- Status
-
Not assessed
- Beneficiary groups
-
Organizations. Society.
- Beneficiaries
-
Not assessed
- Reach
-
Not assessed
- Distribution and access
-
Not assessed
- Duration
-
Not assessed
- Expected?
-
Yes
- Costs and harms
-
Not assessed
Measurement
- Studies
-
Not assessed
- Study design
-
Not assessed
- Measurement
-
Not assessed
- Setting and sample
-
Not assessed
- Measures
-
two scribes wrote the Great Isaiah Scroll, switching at columns 27–29
- Comparison
-
the prevailing scholarly view that a single scribe copied the whole scroll
- Results
-
Reference: the entire manuscript was copied by one scribe, with minor interventions by other, contemporaneous and also much later, scribes. Result: two main scribes, each showing different writing patterns, were responsible for the Great Isaiah Scroll.
- Additional value from AI
-
Not assessed
- Limitations
-
Not assessed
- Denominators
-
Not assessed
- Materials for replication
-
Not assessed
Money
- Kind of value
-
Not assessed
- Amount
-
Not assessed
- Currency and prices
-
Not assessed
- Period and unit
-
Not assessed
- Realization
-
Not assessed
- Recipients and payers
-
Not assessed
- Gross or net
-
Not assessed
- Included costs
-
Not assessed
- Comparison
-
Not assessed
- Method
-
Not assessed
- Return and payback
-
Not assessed
People and places
- Participants
-
Developer:
University of Groningen (Dhali, Schomaker, Popović). Operator: University of Groningen. - Jurisdictions
-
Benefit: Groningen,
Netherlands. Developer: Netherlands. Operator: Netherlands. - Ownership and control
-
Not assessed
- Dependencies
-
Not assessed
- Cross-border connections
-
Not assessed
- Geopolitical implications
-
Not assessed
Follow-up
- Conditions for replication
-
Sufficient legible text per column. Features that separate writers rather than pens or parchment. Statistical significance of the separation.
- Replication attempts
-
Not assessed
- Later findings
-
The cited sources state only an intention to analyze other scrolls next; no later development was found,.
- Availability
-
Not assessed
- Institutional decision
-
Not assessed
- Grounds
-
Not assessed
- Action and result
-
Not assessed
- Success criterion
-
Not assessed
Evidence
- Source numbers
-
AIBD-0071-source-0001–0002
- Citations
-
Numbered references below.
- Language
-
Not assessed
- Source relationships
-
Developer
- Original evidence
-
Not assessed
- Access and versions
-
Not assessed
- Supported findings
-
Not assessed
- Evidence links
-
Not assessed
- Evidence strength
-
Not assessed
- Missing evidence
-
Not assessed
Grades
- Assessed benefits
-
Organizations. Society.
- Depth
-
Organizations: 1. Society: 1.
- Reasons
-
Organizations: Small: a new scholarly finding for Dead Sea Scrolls research published after peer review; no institutional change reported. Society: Small: knowledge about the production of one manuscript; the sources claim no wider effect.
- Observed or intended
-
Not assessed
- Rubric
-
Not assessed
- Assessor and date
-
Not assessed
- Alternative assessments
-
Not assessed
- Fill
-
The makers' claim
Entry details
- Kind
-
Not assessed
- Related entries
-
Not assessed
- Field
-
History and archives. Palaeography of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
- Purpose
-
Writer identification in ancient manuscripts to distinguish individual scribes
- Dates
-
Date basis unassessed: 2021 (precision unassessed). Updated: 21 October 2026.
- Stage
-
Not assessed
- Version
-
SHA-256: 96f49483ad75…
References
- Other identifiers
-
Not assessed
- Category mappings
-
Not assessed
- Brief
-
Not assessed
- Revisions
-
6 revisions. Latest: 21 October 2026.
Sources
-
Peer-reviewed study Developer
Popović, M., Dhali, M. A., Schomaker, L. (2021). Artificial intelligence based writer identification generates new evidence for the unknown scribes of the Dead Sea Scrolls exemplified by the Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa). PLOS ONE.
Demonstrating that two main scribes, each showing different writing patterns, were responsible for the Great Isaiah Scroll
-
Press release Developer
University of Groningen, via Phys.org (2021). Cracking the code of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Phys.org.
His analysis of textural and allographic features showed that the 54 columns of text in the Great Isaiah Scroll fell into two different groups.