MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396535651 · doi:10.24124/2018/59483

Archaeological risk framework tool: application of predictive modelling in archaeology (a case study of Prince George municipal)

2018· dissertation· en· W4396535651 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrew Agbonigha

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeological Research and Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorge (robot)StatisticArchaeologyTerrainLogistic regressionPredictabilityElevation (ballistics)Sample (material)Predictive modellingPredictive powerComputer scienceHistoryGeographyCartographyEngineeringStatisticsArtificial intelligenceMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Archaeological Predictive modelling is a tool that predicts the location of archaeological sites and materials in a region, based on the observed pattern in a sample data or on assumptions about human behavior. This project examines the combination of variables to produce a model with high predictability and the application of inductive predictive modelling method in locating areas of high archaeological potential in Prince George using Binary Logistic Regression. Results from the analysis have shown that terrain variables: slope, ruggedness, elevation, solar incidence and proximity to water, jointly explains the predictive model and that the model successfully predicts areas of high and low potentials in Prince George municipal. The results from the Kvamme’s gain statistic shows that the predictive model is moderately efficient. The study recommends that by incorporating more terrain variables, the model performance will be higher and probably be more efficient.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArchaeological Research and ProtectionFrench-language works237,207