Application of Ground-Penetrating Radar to Mapping Archaeological Features at the Gould Site, Port au Choix
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
GROUND-PENETRATING RADAR (GPR) is a geophysical technique used to help identify and characterize archaeological sites prior to excavation. GPR is particularly well suited to archaeological surveys because it provides a nondestructive, rapid way to provide continuous high-resolution profiles across a site. Because all information is acquired at the ground surface, there is no disturbance of buried cultural material. Data are collected at a walking pace, permitting a large area to be surveyed relatively quickly, particularly when compared to the amount of time required for hand excavation (Figure 1a). Although post-collection processing of the data is possible, and in most cases is desirable, many systems provide the almost immediate creation of a paper or electronic version of the survey record, allowing the investigator to review data in the field. This feature allows the survey pattern to be altered or refined immediately to allow closer investigation of anomalous areas. Application of standard values for electromagnetic wave propagation rates calculated for a variety of materials permits two-way travel times to be converted to depth rapidly, and aids in archaeological assessment of a site while in the field. In this paper we explore the application of GPR to the pre-excavation analysis on an area of the Gould Site (EeBi-42), Port au Choix (Figure 2a). Earlier excavations at the site provided “ground truth” for on-site survey decisions. Excavations after the GPR survey allowed testing of data interpretation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it