MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1565254330 · doi:10.1002/arp.426

Assessing Damage to Archaeological Artefacts in Compacted Soil Using Microcomputed Tomography Scanning

2011· article· en· W1565254330 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchaeological Prospection · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicBuilding materials and conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReplicaPotteryBreakageGeologyArchaeologyComputed tomographyMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringMineralogyComposite materialGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This laboratory study investigated the susceptibility of subsurface archaeological ecofacts/artefacts to incidental damage from utility construction activities, as it pertains to the cultural heritage aspects of environmental impact assessment and municipal planning. The research objective was to use X‐ray microcomputed tomography (micro‐CT) imaging to non‐destructively determine the nature and extent of any damage inflicted on a range of ecofact and artefact types (authentic and replica) embedded in repacked, plastic clay soil by pure soil strain at variable levels of static load compactive effort up to 600 kPa. Uniaxial soil compression testing and micro‐CT imaging were combined procedurally to meet this objective. It was concluded that lithic artefacts were largely immune to damage from stresses up to 600 kPa due to their high strength properties, while moderately fragile ecofacts (replica charred maize kernels) exhibited evidence of dimensional distortion, but not of breakage. Very fragile ecofacts (unionid freshwater clam shells) showed dimensional distortion and minor structural damage at lower stresses (50 and 100 kPa), but significant breakage and fragmentation at higher stresses (300 and 600 kPa). Overall, the micro‐CT technique was shown to be useful in monitoring and describing any breakage or morphometric distortion in a wide range of test ecofacts/artefacts compressed in a clay‐rich soil matrix. However, earthen artefacts, such as terra cotta pottery sherds, were found to be problematic using the micro‐CT imaging technique for this application due to similarities in the densities of the ceramic sherds and the surrounding compressed soil matrix. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it