MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043153484 · doi:10.1002/arp.319

Common‐ and multi‐offset ground‐penetrating radar study of a Roman villa, Tourega, Portugal

2007· article· en· W2043153484 on OpenAlexaff
Brooke A. Berard, J. M. Maillol

Bibliographic record

VenueArchaeological Prospection · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsARC Resources (Canada)University of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround-penetrating radarOffset (computer science)GeologyRemote sensingRadarComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A ground‐penetrating radar (GPR) survey was conducted at the site of the first to fourth century AD Roman villa of Tourega, near Évora, Alentejo region, Portugal. This site has been partially excavated, revealing a bathhouse complex consisting of a tank reservoir, multiple bathing rooms and a major corridor. The excavated portion of Tourega provides direct archaeological feedback as to the size, shape, depth and orientation of structures revealed by GPR surveys. A 4500 m2 area surrounding the known site was surveyed using common‐offset 500 MHz and 200 MHz pseudo‐three‐dimensional acquisition. Amplitude time‐slice analysis reveals a large number of well‐defined additional structures confirming a much broader extension of the site. For shallow buried rectilinear structural targets, the high frequency 500 MHz common‐offset data provide excellent imaging. However, limited depth penetration at 500 MHz necessitated a lower frequency of investigation; therefore 200 MHz common‐ offset and multi‐offset data were also acquired. Two 200 MHz multi‐offset GPR profiles were obtained over the large double‐walled structure identified on the time‐slices, acquired using a newly proposed multi‐offset acquisition technique – rapid multi‐offset acquisition. This acquisition technique uses the existing single‐channel GPR system, is extremely cost‐effective, and easily acquires a high fold. Rapid multi‐offset acquisition provides an average time saving up to five times that of stationary multi‐offset profiling. The 200 MHz multi‐offset profiles provide a greater depth penetration and enhanced structural detail (i.e. improved imaging of dipping structures) than comparable 200 MHz common‐offset profiles. Post‐stack, inverse‐Q filtering increases vertical resolution and interpretability of the multi‐offset sections via removal of wavelet dispersion. Although multi‐offset data are less feasible for characterizing this site in three dimensions because of the large time commitment in data collection, two multi‐offset profiles over key structures of interest improved the final site interpretation, with enhanced image quality and higher resolution than comparable common‐offset profiles. The combined results of the multi‐offset survey with a common‐offset grid should encourage a more frequent use of multi‐offset data at archaeological sites when the depth extent of the archaeological site is uncertain. Copyright © 2007 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.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations22
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchaeological ProspectionSame topicGeophysical Methods and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207