MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7105090526 · doi:10.5284/1137835

Sunderland Museum and Winter Gardens: Third-Floor Rooms. Historic Building Record

2025· article· en· W7105090526 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchaeology Data Service · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Architecture and Urbanism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOfficerWork (physics)Plan (archaeology)Range (aeronautics)Nova scotiaNegative

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A programme of building recording was carried out in March 2024 and March 2025 within the third-floor storage rooms of the late nineteenth-century Sunderland Museum building adjacent to Mowbray Park in the city centre of Sunderland (See SCC Planning ref. 23/02281/LB3). The work was carried out in advance of works by Sunderland City Council to undertake repairs to the building fabric of the 1879 building, including works to address damage to internal areas caused by active water ingress to the building. In response to a Project Specification document issued by the Tyne & Wear Archaeological Officer (Planning reference: 23/02281/LB3; TWAS reference: MON19268; issued: 17/11/2023) photographic recording was undertaken on 21st March 2024 and, following minor works including partial stripping of walls, on 4th March 2025 using a Panasonic DMC-FZ1000 camera. In addition, the history of the building was researched through locally-available and online historic maps and records. This is very clearly a building of utilitarian function with a range of features, including plasterwork coving, wooden skirting boards, door and door-frames and a rounded window all typical of later 19th century work. Later sub-division and adaptation of the internal space has resulted in the loss or obscuring or some early features whilst contributing little of merit to the range of visible features. Despite alterations made to the site of recording for use as stores and recent repairs, this part of the building retains elements of its original character and forms an integral, though little seen, part of the wider complex. It is strongly recommended that any alterations to the building for the purposes of the proposed restoration and reuse, either during the course of the proposed or future works, should retain historic fabric and features wherever possible.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.486
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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