MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6894406026 · doi:10.5284/1094004

Land West of St. John's Road, Bungay, Suffolk: Archaeological Trial Trench Evaluation

2015· article· en· W6894406026 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchaeology Data Service · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDitchAssemblage (archaeology)PrehistoryNatural (archaeology)MesolithicExcavationTrenchPotterySettlement (finance)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eighteen trial trenches, totalling 820m, wee excavated on land west of St John's Road, Bungay, Suffolk, in advance of proposed development for housing and employment. The aim of the work was to characterize the archaeological potential of the proposed development area. The site is located on an east-facing hillside overlooking a steep-sided stream valley; the stream flows into the River Waveney just under a mile to the north. The evaluation identified two main areas of archaeological potential. On the high ground in the north-west of the site (Trenches 1-4) was an Iron Age (probably c. 350 - 50 BC) boundary ditch containing a dump of settlement waste including a large (for the period) assemblage of ironworking slag. Other features in this area, including a posthole at the end of Trench 3, add to the picture of settlement activity. In the southern half of the site (Trenches 13-18) was a broadly rectilinear system of field boundary ditches containing flint-tempered Iron Age pottery and later prehistoric (later-2nd- to 1st-millennium BC) struck flint. No archaeologically-significant deposits were identified in the central (Trenches 7-11) and north-eastern (Trenches 5-6) parts of the site. Other anomalies identified by a preceding geophysical survey were found to be either natural in origin or post-medieval field boundaries. One 'kinked' field boundary/ drainage ditch in the south-west of the site is medieval in origin. A single natural geological feature, located on a sandy knoll in the centre of the southern part of the site, contained a small but homogenous assemblage of Mesolithic struck flint, probably representing some of the debris from an episode of flint-knapping, which became accidentally incorporated into the feature. The evaluation identified two main areas of archaeological potential. On the high ground in the north-west of the site (Trenches 1-4) was an Iron Age (probably c. 350 - 50 BC) boundary ditch containing a dump of settlement waste including a large (for the period) assemblage of ironworking slag. Other features in this area, including a posthole at the end of Trench 3, add to the picture of settlement activity. In the southern half of the site (Trenches 13-18) was a broadly rectilinear system of field boundary ditches containing flint-tempered Iron Age pottery and later prehistoric (later-2nd- to 1st-millennium BC) struck flint. No archaeologically-significant deposits were identified in the central (Trenches 7-11) and north-eastern (Trenches 5-6) parts of the site. Other anomalies identified by a preceding geophysical survey were found to be either natural in origin or post-medieval field boundaries. One 'kinked' field boundary/ drainage ditch in the south-west of the site is medieval in origin. A single natural geological feature, located on a sandy knoll in the centre of the southern part of the site, contained a small but homogenous assemblage of Mesolithic struck flint, probably representing some of the debris from an episode of flint-knapping, which cvbecame accidentally incorporated into the feature.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchaeology Data ServiceSame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207