MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6969422876 · doi:10.5284/1120334

15 Small Street, Bristol: Historic Building Record and Archaeological Watching Brief

2019· article· en· W6969422876 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchaeology Data Service · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Architecture and Urbanism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClearancePlot (graphics)Quarter (Canadian coin)Artifact (error)Historic siteMiddle Ages

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historic building recording of 15 Small Street, Bristol and archaeological watching brief at 15 and 16 Small Street, Bristol. From the results, it is apparent that at some time after the first quarter of the 19th century a late medieval tenement plot, which had been at least partially rebuilt and cellared by the early 17th century, underwent major structural alterations to create the Assize Courts Hotel. The building plot (with a cellar) was refronted as the main hotel building and incorporated a standing 17th-century structure to the rear. The adjoining late medieval tenement plot (without a cellar) was cleared of all above-ground structures and then partially built over at the street-frontage at ground floor level. The remainder of the plot was largely left open to provide an alleyway and courtyard area for the hotel. Further alterations and extensions were undertaken at various times to the combined properties until the present refurbishment. The structural watching brief indicates the high probability for the survival of standing medieval and 17th-century walls and other features within properties along Small Street, hidden and incorporated into later phases of building, while the archaeological watching brief highlights the potential for the survival of remains both medieval and post-medieval below ground in less disturbed areas.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.006

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.184 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchaeology Data ServiceSame topicHistorical Architecture and UrbanismFrench-language works237,207