DOCUMENTATION AND MONITORING OF UNDERWATER ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES USING 3D IMAGING TECHNIQUES: THE CASE STUDY OF THE “NYMPHAEUM OF PUNTA EPITAFFIO” (BAIAE, NAPLES)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The preservation status of an underwater cultural site can be determined as the combination of two primary factors, namely the site physical integrity, which results from the past and present interaction of the site itself with the biological/chemical agents located in the surrounding environment, and the exposure of the site to human-related threats. Methods to survey underwater archaeological sites have evolved considerably in the last years in order to face the challenges and problems in archaeological prospection, documentation, monitoring, and data collection.This paper presents a case-study of an archaeological documentation campaign addressed to study and monitor the preservation status of an underwater archaeological site by combining the quantitative measurements coming from optical and acoustic surveys with the study of biological colonization and bioerosion phenomena affecting ancient artefacts. In particular, we present the first results obtained in the survey and documentation campaign carried out during the spring – summer 2018 in the “Nymphaeum of Punta Epitaffio” located in the Marine Protected Area - Underwater Park of Baiae (Naples).
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".