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
Archaeological 3D GIS provides archaeologists with a guide to explore and understand the \nunprecedented opportunities for collecting, visualising, and analysing archaeological \ndatasets in three dimensions. \nWith platforms allowing archaeologists to link, query, and analyse in a virtual, georeferenced \nspace information collected by different specialists, the book highlights how \nit is possible to re-think aspects of theory and practice which relate to GIS. It explores \nwhich questions can be addressed in such a new environment and how they are going \nto impact the way we interpret the past. By using material from several international \ncase studies such as Pompeii, Çatalhöyük, as well as prehistoric and protohistoric sites \nin Southern Scandinavia, this book discusses the use of the third dimension in support \nof archaeological practice. \nThis book will be essential for researchers and scholars who focus on archaeology and \nspatial analysis, and is designed and structured to serve as a textbook for GIS and digital \narchaeology courses.
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) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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