MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Preliminary Report: Archaeology Education in Southeast Asia

2019· article· en· W2979312627 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Noel Hidalgo Tan

Bibliographic record

VenueSPAFA Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Processing and 3D Reconstruction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPeking UniversityWuhan UniversityNational Tsing Hua UniversityWaseda UniversityMurdoch UniversityGriffith UniversityYale UniversityUniversity of New South WalesUniversity College DublinLa Trobe UniversityNational Taiwan UniversityMichigan State UniversitySichuan UniversityNewcastle UniversitySun Yat-sen UniversityCardiff UniversityUniversity of LeedsXiamen UniversityUniversity of MissouriNorthwestern UniversityDurham UniversityLanzhou UniversityBanaras Hindu UniversityUniversity of LeicesterLomonosov Moscow State UniversityUniversity of DelhiTsinghua UniversityTrent UniversityCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityUniversità degli Studi di PadovaPrinceton University
KeywordsSoutheast asiaArchaeologyGeographyTraining (meteorology)HistoryEthnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report presents the preliminary results of the SEAMEO SPAFA Survey on Archaeology Education in Southeast Asia which was conducted online from September to December 2018. The aim of the survey was to understand the archaeology education landscape in Southeast Asia and identify the current needs in archaeology education and skills training. 330 people responded to the survey, which was available in multiple languages. These initial results outline where archaeologists in the region studied archaeology; public perceptions of archaeology education in the region; an overview of the archaeology profession and industry and the main training needs identified by those studying or working in Southeast Asian archaeology today.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.003

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPAFA JournalSame topicImage Processing and 3D ReconstructionFrench-language works237,207