Petty Hall Barn, Orton, Cumbria: Heritage Statement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prior to the submission of a planning application for the conversion of a disused barn at Petty Hall, Orton, Cumbria Greenlane Archaeology was carried out a heritage statement. This comprised a desk-based assessment and building recording, undertaken in March 2019. Petty Hall has a date stone of 1604, although it may have earlier origins. It belonged to the Birkbeck family, who were originally from Hornby Hall near Brougham. It passed, perhaps through marriage, to Christopher Petty, from whom it now takes its name, before passing to the Garnetts. They constructed the barn, which has a date stone of 1740. The barn represents a good example of a bank barn of relatively early date, built with its long side set into the slope. It would have had a threshing floor on the upper floor and housing for cattle below. Unusually, it also incorporated a passageway from east to west at its south end and a small outshut on the west side extending over both floors, which probably served as a grain store. Maps show it retained its original footprint throughout the 19th century, but in the early 20th century, after 1915, it had a concrete block extension added to the west to provide additional cattle housing. This late addition perhaps related to legislative changes regarding the housing of animals made in the 20th century. A further timber shed clad with corrugated metal sheeting was also added after that.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.408 | 0.069 |
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".