Bibliographic record
Abstract
The results of the investigations have revealed a sequence of Leyton Gravel overlain by Enfield Silt ('brickearth') and Made Ground. Here, the Gravel surface lies at a level of 8.5m OD, and it is thought likely that the site lies above the general level of the Holocene floodplain of the River Lea; no peat or tufaceous deposits were identified such as those recorded at lower levels within the alluvium at Edmonton EcoPark (Batchelor et al., 2019), Stonehill Business Park (Young, 2014) or Advent Way (Green et al., 2006). A substantially reworked, coarse-grained Enfield Silt deposit was recorded overlying the Gravel in the northern part of the site at between 8.5 and 10m OD, considered to be of very low palaeoenvironmental potential. Within the observed sequence in the northern area of the site there would appear to be no potential for peat or tufaceous deposits, although no records were available for the southern area of the site. Given that the wider model indicates that the Gravel surface declines in this direction, it is not clear if a different sequence, including alluvial deposits, may be present here. In terms of its Palaeolithic archaeological potential, it is considered unlikely that that the deposits at the site will contain Palaeolithic archaeological remains, either in primary context or as individual artefacts contemporary with the deposition of the Gravel or Enfield Silt. However, on the basis of the unknown nature of the sequence in the southern part of the site, it is recommended that further geoarchaeological monitoring is undertaken of any geotechnical interventions or excavations in this area. Further observations will help to clarify the nature of the sequence here, and provide an opportunity for sampling any organic deposits or examining the Enfield Silt for Palaeolithic artefacts. The results of the investigations have revealed a sequence of Leyton Gravel overlain by Enfield Silt ('brickearth') and Made Ground. Here, the Gravel surface lies at a level of 8.5m OD, and it is thought likely that the site lies above the general level of the Holocene floodplain of the River Lea; no peat or tufaceous deposits were identified such as those recorded at lower levels within the alluvium at Edmonton EcoPark (Batchelor et al., 2019), Stonehill Business Park (Young, 2014) or Advent Way (Green et al., 2006). A substantially reworked, coarse-grained Enfield Silt deposit was recorded overlying the Gravel in the northern part of the site at between 8.5 and 10m OD, considered to be of very low palaeoenvironmental potential. Within the observed sequence in the northern area of the site there would appear to be no potential for peat or tufaceous deposits, although no records were available for the southern area of the site. Given that the wider model indicates that the Gravel surface declines in this direction, it is not clear if a different sequence, including alluvial deposits, may be present here. In terms of its Palaeolithic archaeological potential, it is considered unlikely that that the deposits at the site will contain Palaeolithic archaeological remains, either in primary context or as individual artefacts contemporary with the deposition of the Gravel or Enfield Silt. However, on the basis of the unknown nature of the sequence in the southern part of the site, it is recommended that further geoarchaeological monitoring is undertaken of any geotechnical interventions or excavations in this area. Further observations will help to clarify the nature of the sequence here, and provide an opportunity for sampling any organic deposits or examining the Enfield Silt for Palaeolithic artefacts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.479 | 0.175 |
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".