Re-Visiting Viking Vinland: II. 'Virtual Excavation' of 'Keelness', a Viking Shipwreck Site in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The series of papers, 'Re-Visiting Viking Vinland', encompasses a re-evaluation of the Viking voyages from Greenland to North America, from about 985 to 1026 A.D. Searching for their American landfalls used multiple approaches: clues from Norse sagas, logic, creative imagination, and advanced imaging technology. Paper I described locating 'Keelness', a Viking shipwreck site in Newfoundland, Canada, but Covid-19 prevented professional, on-site follow-up. Paper II describes our alternative, a 'virtual excavation', using only remote imaging via drone, plus advanced data-processing of both visible and thermal (infrared) data. Starting with the 'stocks', a support structure for Viking ship repair, other features were accidentally found, identified, and interpreted. These included damaged hull planks ('strakes'), parts of the broken keel, a pit-house for shelter, and the hole where a keel-piece was erected as a navigational marker; with the site named (Norse, 'Kjalarnes') ('Keelness' or Keel Point). Results of this non-contact, non-destructive 'virtual excavation' supported our hypothesis that this site is the 'Keelness' mentioned in the Norse sagas. Fragments of Leif Eriksson's original ship may still be preserved in a sphagnum moss bog after 1000 years, accessible for further study, and perhaps providing valuable information on both provenience (origin) and provenance (history) of these iconic artifacts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".