MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7106227668 · doi:10.5284/1138198

Archaeological Building Recording at the Opal Sheffield 3 site, Sudbury Street, Meadow Street and Malinda Street, Sheffield, South Yorkshire

2008· article· en· W7106227668 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchaeology Data Service · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcavationDemolitionWork (physics)Industrial areaBuilding constructionArchitecture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In November 2006 ARCUS were commissioned by Opal Property Group to undertake a scheme of archaeological building recording of former industrial workshops within the Shalesmoor district of Sheffield (centred on NGR: SK 347 881). This work formed part of a programme of above- and below-ground archaeological survey, excavation and analysis, required as a planning condition. The condition was imposed following an archaeological desk-based assessment, an archaeological buildings appraisal and statement of archaeological potential, examining the proposed development area. Standing buildings were present on all the five sites (Areas A, B, C, D and E), although the public house, The Meadow Street Hotel, in Area A is not included in this report. An archaeological photographic survey was undertaken for the public house and can be found in 930g.2() (Dawson, 2008). In addition, modern structures located in Areas C and H were not included in the building recording. Areas B and E contained historic buildings, parts of which retained elements of nineteenth-century works. Significantly, crucible cellars were found in both these areas beneath the recorded buildings. These either date from the earliest phase of buildings recorded in the areas or prior to their construction. Area E was substantially re-built in the 1930s-1940s with a nineteenth-century range to the rear where some original features remained. Areas B and E underwent a detailed building recording programme, including measured survey and photography. Area A consisted of a concrete slab and made ground of building rubble, associated with the demolition of mid- to late-nineteenth-century housing. Area C contained a modern electricity sub station. The works located in Area D were built in the 1960s. An archaeological photographic survey was carried out in both areas A and C and within building D.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.630
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.224 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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