MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013136497 · doi:10.1139/juvs-2014-0017

Making the invisible visible: using UAS-based high-resolution color-infrared imagery to identify buried medieval monastery walls

2015· article· en· W2013136497 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jan Lehmann, Keturah Z. Smithson, Torsten Prinz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeological Research and Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemote sensingNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexVegetation (pathology)ArchaeologyReflectivitySatellite imagerySatelliteHigh resolutionGeologyEnvironmental sciencePhysical geographyGeographyClimate changeOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Remote sensing techniques have become an increasingly important tool for surveying archaeological sites. However, budgeting issues in archaeological research often limit the application of satellite or airborne imagery. Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) provide a flexible, quick, and more economical alternative to commonly used remote sensing techniques. In this study, the buried features of the archaeological site of the Kleinburlo monastery, near Münster, Germany, were identified using high-resolution color–infrared (CIR) images collected from a UAS platform. Based on these CIR images, a modified normalised difference vegetation index (NDVIblue) was calculated, showing reflectance spectra of vegetation anomalies caused by water stress. In the presented study, the vegetation growing on top of the buried walls was better nourished than the surrounding plants because very wet conditions over the days previous to data collection caused higher levels of water stress in the surrounding water-drenched land. This difference in water stress was a good indicator for detecting archaeological remains.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Unmanned Vehicle SystemsSame topicArchaeological Research and ProtectionFrench-language works237,207