MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6894159426 · doi:10.5284/1099740

59 High Street, Buntingford, Herts.: Archaeological Evaluation

2011· article· en· W6894159426 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchaeology Data Service · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Heritage
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFootprintExcavationArchaeological evidencePeriod (music)Work (physics)Front (military)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to characterise the archaeological potential of the site of a proposed new development on land to the rear of 59 High Street, Buntingford, Hertfordshire, the Heritage Network was commissioned by Southbeach Developments Ltd to undertake an archaeological field evaluation. This work was a requirement of the planning consent granted by the local planning authority. Two trial trenches were excavated across the footprint of the proposed new dwellings. This revealed several phases of activity towards the front of the site, most likely associated with the use of the site as a farmyard during the 18th-19th century. More significant was the identification of a heavily truncated pit in this area which contained remains of Romano-British date. This represents the first stratified evidence of activity of this date in the area On the basis of these results, the risk that the development might encounter archaeological remains of significance may be considered to be Moderate for the Romano British period and Low for all other periods.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.003
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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.155 · 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