MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3105157974 · doi:10.1190/gpr2020-012.1

Sensing houses: New investigations of ground-penetrating radar at Tsimshian Village sites on the northern northwest coast

2020· article· en· W3105157974 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue18th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar, Golden, Colorado, 14–19 June 2020 · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround-penetrating radarRemote sensingGeologyRadarArchaeologyGeographyEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Archaeologists have embraced GPR as a powerful tool for exploring subsurface spatial patterns in the archaeological record without excavation. Yet, remote sensing technologies have not been widely applied on the Northwest Coast of North America, largely because the most common anthropogenic site matrix is the heterogenous shell-bearing site (shell midden). The Prince Rupert Harbour (PRH) region (Figure 1), home of the Coast Tsimshian is an example of this geophysical challenge. It has been systematically mapped for over five decades, creating a large inventory of massive shell terraced villages at which geophysical surveys have not been widely employed. The Tsimshian have inhabited PRH for millennia, building monumental winter villages that are represented in the archaeological record and detailed Indigenous oral histories. The Tsimshian had a highly specialized yet diverse marine economy, a keystone resource was shellfish, which resulted in village sites engineered with shell matrices through recurrent deposition from food consumption, but also as a result of massive short-term terracing projects. In this paper, we describe our initial efforts to resolve architectural patterns in this complex archaeological and environmental context and compare the radar results to magnetic gradiometry and low impact ground-truthing results, including sediment coring and mapping of erosion faces. We also discuss the challenges, potential benefits, limitations and efficacy of developing a GPR-based feature confidence index to predict the identity of subsurface archaeological features from geophysical signals in such complex subsurface components. Finally, we consider the utility of GPR as a tool for community heritage management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.219 · 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