Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The substantial corpus of unpublished commercial and research excavation reports produced in the United Kingdom provides valuable data for investigating macro-scale changes in the archaeobotanical record. This article presents a comprehensive synthesis and reanalysis of archaeobotanical evidence from Yorkshire spanning the first evidence of cultivated cereal crops from ca. 4000 bce until 1100 ce . Yorkshire’s macro-botanical evidence has been collated and analysed using ubiquity and relative abundance data to establish long-term diachronic trends in the regional cereal crop records. Radiocarbon dated cereals have also been assembled to characterise the chronology of introductions and shifts in crop choice. The main outcomes of this analysis are: (1) a refinement of the chronologies for the introduction of new cereals to Yorkshire and (2) a clarification of their long-term trajectories as crops in the region. This article demonstrates that Roman Period arable practices were firmly rooted in pre-existing Iron Age traditions, with little alteration following conquest. Results also show a significant transition in the post-Roman Period away from a spelt wheat agriculture to barley agriculture complemented by other emerging free-threshing cereals. The climatic and socio-cultural context of this transition in the 5 and 6th centuries ce is discussed.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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".