CANADA WATER Plot D Rotherhithe London SE16, Archaeological and geoarchaeological watching brief report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Within the Plot D area a total of fifteen boreholes, drilled using cable percussion and rotary rigs, and three trial trenches were undertaken during this investigation. All boreholes and trial trenches were monitored by the geoarchaeologist who made a record of the deposit sequence. Following the fieldwork, the information from the watching brief was supplemented with additional data comprising data from other MOLA investigations, within the site and the wider area. The resulting deposit model has been used to analyse the landscape position and geological setting of the site and the sequence and distribution of deposits within the site to assess their archaeological and geoarchaeological potential. Eighteen interventions were logged by MOLA across Plot D, consisting of fifteen boreholes and three trial trenches. Of the boreholes, six encountered Holocene alluvial sediments, four of which successfully penetrated into the underlying floodplain (Shepperton) gravel strata and geological bedrock. The elevation of the Shepperton gravels (equivalent to the early Holocene surface) ranges from -3.15m OD to -6.75m OD with an average surface elevation of -5.32m OD. The early Holocene mapping indicates a gentle slope from north to south toward the Thames. The surface elevation of the alluvium ranges from 4.11m OD to -6.75m OD. The average surface elevation was -0.38m OD, and the average thickness was 2.83m. Across the bulk of the site, the alluvial deposits consisted of soft to firm grey sometimes slightly gravelly clays often with pockets of dark brown peat and occasional plant remains. Substantial truncation and/or apparent disturbed or redeposited alluvial deposits were recorded across the site (particularly in the west and in the eastern central southern area) which probably relate to the excavation and subsequent backfilling of the historic Surrey Commercial Docks. The 19th century significant Dock Walls were encountered in all three Trial Trenches (and Plot D_BH-DW01 in TT01) between approximately 0.5m and 1.25m below the modern ground surface, consisting of a thin concrete layer over yellow and brown brick
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.225 | 0.024 |
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".