Cottesbrooke Estate, Northamptonshire. Geoarchaeological and Archaeological Trial Pit Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
York Archaeology (the new trading name of Trent and Peak Archaeology), were commissioned by the Environment Agency on behalf of the Cottesbrooke Estate to undertake a geoarchaeological survey and an archaeological test pit survey as part of the groundworks associated with a Countryside Stewardship scheme centring on NGR SP 73610 72104 (Area 1) and SP 73663 71348 (Area 2) Five archaeological trial-pits measuring 5m x 2m were excavated within the southern part of Area 2 of the Cottesbrooke estate. Despite the trial-pits proximity to a series of prehistoric crop marks and the Brampton branch of the River Nene, no archaeological features or waterlogged deposits were identified within any of the trial-pits, possibly indicating an ephemeral archaeological presence within a historically worked and cultivated landscape. The hand auger survey carried out a total of 51 holes across both northern and southern areas, finding very limited preservation of organic material. Deposits in the northern area were found to be predominantly dry, with a single instance of thinly developed waterlogged organic material recovered from the Brampton palaeochannel (4b). The southern area found infrequent instances of waterlogged sediments, demonstrating, an albeit low, possibility discovering organic material preservation in other unsurveyed areas across the site. As a result, the archaeological and geoarchaeological potential of the study area is considered low.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.206 | 0.018 |
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".