The 2005 Rolt Memorial Lecture Industrial Archaeology or the Archaeology of the Industrial Period? Models, Methodology and the Future of Industrial Archaeology
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
This paper outlines in brief the development of Industrial Archaeology in Britain as a mainstream \nbranch of archaeology over the last 50 years, before then reviewing some of the recent methodological \ndevelopments in IA. The author argues that whilst Industrial Archaeology embraces both the \narchaeology of technology and the archaeology of industrialisation, it is the latter strand that is the \ndefining feature of much modern IA work. A wide range of techniques emphasising both landscape \nand social change, linked to technological development, have been developed by those studying the \nphenomenon of British industrialisation since 1991. It is argued that the radical changes to the \nproduction, consumption, and urban nature of this newly industrialised society is best studied \narchaeologically through the medium of this new Industrial Archaeology. Furthermore, this social \nand landscape approach, coupled with the study of technological change, could be used to compare \nthe different rates and geographical location of industrialisation around the globe from a distinctive \narchaeological perspective.
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 | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.079 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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