MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168026942 · doi:10.3390/rs13112094

Deciphering a Timeline of Demise at Medieval Angkor, Cambodia Using Remote Sensing

2021· article· en· W3168026942 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah Klassen, Tiago Attorre, David Brotherson, Rachna Chhay, Wayne Johnson, Ian Moffat, Roland Fletcher

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeological Research and Protection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDivision of Graduate EducationFlinders UniversitySocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaSchool of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State UniversityArizona State University
KeywordsDemiseUnrestMonsoonGeographyAncient historyHistoryArchaeologyGeologyPoliticsPolitical scienceMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Greater Angkor Region was the center of the Khmer Empire from the 9th until the 13th to the 14th centuries CE, when it entered a period of decline. Many studies have suggested that the decline of Angkor was precipitated by several factors, including severe monsoons, geopolitical shifts, and invasions. In this paper, we use light detection and ranging and ground penetrating radar to investigate the possible intersection of two of these existential threats in one feature: the North Bank Wall. Our results indicate that this feature was designed with dual functionality of extending the urban area’s defenses to the east of Angkor Thom while maintaining the existing infrastructure for the distribution and disposal of water. These findings suggest that the North Bank Wall was built before the severe droughts in the mid-13th century. The timing of the construction indicates that the perceived need for additional security—whether from internal factional disputes or external adversaries—predated the final adaptations to the hydraulic network during the unprecedented monsoon variability of the 14th century. These results indicate that perceived political unrest may have played a more important role in the decline of the site than previously known.

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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicArchaeological Research and ProtectionFrench-language works237,207