Bibliographic record
Abstract
The monitoring programme on the groundworks for the present project was divided into three phases. Phase 1 consisted of ground reduction across the entire site. Phase 2 consisted of the altering of the course of an existing stream. Phase 3 consisted of other intrusive groundworks, comprising the excavation of a trench for the disposal of organic matter, together with the footings trenches to the dwelling in Plot 1, the footings for a garden wall in Plot 1 and a soakaway in Plot 1. It was considered that the present investigation had the potential to contribute to a greater understanding of the origins and development of Deanshanger, from the medieval period onwards. The accumulated evidence demonstrates that site was subject to episodes of flooding in the past, alluvial deposits were encountered at a depth of approximately 0.55m below the present ground level. These deposits had been removed on the eastern side of the site and a bank built up to form a wharf on the western side of the canal. The upper layer of the bank contained frequent unburnt coal pieces, indicating that it was used for the delivery of coal. The bank was contained on its western side by a wall constructed from unmortared limestone and sandstone blocks. A possible pit, of 19th century date, and an undated linear feature were also encountered. The linear feature, which lay below the alluvial deposits, may represent a palaeo-channel.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".