Dendrochronological Dating of Wooden Buildings in the Novosibirsk Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Сreation of a long-term tree-ring calendar chronology based on archaeological wood in the Novosibirsk region is directly linked with mass dating of wooden buildings. In 2021, for the first time, successful calendar dating of two wooden houses located in Sarachevka, the Novosibirsk Region, was carried out. To study the architectural appearance of each building, a 3D model was built using a high-resolution camera installed aboard an unmannedflying machine. The dendrochronological method was used to date buildings. Cameralprocessing of the samples was carried out according to the standard procedure. Dating of the houses was carried out in two stages: for both of them, a “floating” chronology it was created, after which each of them were standardized and dated relative to the 377-year regional tree-ring chronology. As a result of this, 14 samples from building No. 1 were dated. It was found out that the wood for construction of the building was harvested not earlier than 1904, although the building itself was erected at the beginning of the 20th century. From building No. 2, 10 samples were dated, which made it possible to assert that the wood for the construction was harvested not earlier than 1907, although the building itself was erected in the first quarter of the 20th century. The obtained results updated the dates based the architectural features of both buildings by more than half a century and proved that the archaic features of traditional house building, which were brought by the Russian population to the Novosibirsk Region, preserved until the beginning of the 20th century.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".