MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6968860636 · doi:10.5284/1131856

Land to the rear of 76 Station Road, Langford, Bedfordshire: archaeological evaluation report

2020· article· en· W6968860636 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchaeology Data Service · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Heritage
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoundary (topology)ExcavationArchaeological evidenceHistoric siteWorld heritage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to advise the local planning authority regarding the archaeological potential of a proposed development site on land to the rear of 76 Station Road, Langford, Bedfordshire, the Heritage Network was commissioned to undertake a field evaluation by trial trenching. Nine trenches were excavated across the site, and three features were identified and investigated. These did not produce dateable artefacts but have been interpreted as boundary features of probable post-medieval or modern date. They are not considered to be of high archaeological significance. 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 Nine trenches were excavated across the site and three features were identified and investigated. No dateable artefacts were discovered and the features were identified as post-medieval or modern boundary features.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchaeology Data ServiceSame topicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207