Land South of Cowards Way, Codicote, Beds. archaeological evaluation report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to advise the planning authority regarding the archaeological potential of a proposed development site on land south of Cowards Lane, Codicote, Hertfordshire, the Heritage Network was commissioned to undertake a field evaluation by trial trenching. Eleven trenches each measuring fifty metres long by two metres wide were excavated across the site, exposing a topsoil and subsoil over the natural substrate of soft sandy clay and gravels. The archaeological fieldwork on the present site revealed only one significant archaeological feature, which appeared to be a boundary or drainage ditch of unknown date. The results of the geophysical survey suggested that there may have been a fair amount of previous activity on the site. However excavation revealed that most of this activity was either related to post-medieval and modern quarrying activity or to post-medieval and modern field boundary and drainage management. No other archaeological features, deposits or finds were encountered, during the course of this investigation. On the basis of the results of the evaluation, the risk that the proposed development might have a negative impact on remains of archaeological significance may be considered to be Low for all periods, except the post-medieval and modern periods which may be seen as being Moderate to High. The significance of these finds however is considered to be 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".