Land to the East of Walltown Lodge, Greenhead, Brampton, Northumberland: Archaeological Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The principal aim of the archaeological evaluation on land east of Walltown Lodge was to inform a determination by the NNPA's planning department by establishing the presence and character of any archaeological remains surviving on the site. This was to be achieved through 80 m� of evaluation trenching, a figure agreed with the NNPA and HE. To achieve this, a single L-shaped evaluation trench was planned in central area of the plot. Each arm of the trench was to measure 20 m in length and 2 m wide. Excavation was to reach either down to the first archaeologically significant level, or to the natural subsoil if it was found practical and safe to do so. The trench was able to be excavated in its proposed location, as the conditions of site allowed for this. All excavation was carried out using a 9 tonne 360� mechanical excavator with a toothless ditching bucket. All further archaeological investigation was carried out by hand. No archaeological features were observed during excavation of trench. A fragment of probable Roman CBM and an abraded Roman pottery sherd were recovered from the topsoil. Noted during the project were multiple modern drainage runs coursing in the same west-north-west to east-south-east direction, possibly related to field drainage or to overflow drainage from the waste water tank belonging to Walltown Lodge in the western part of the parcel of land. These were filled with fine gravel and redeposited clay. Aside from the topsoil finds from the north-south arm of the trench, no finds, features or deposits of archaeological interest were observed during the project.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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; 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".