Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to characterise the archaeological potential of land to the northeast of George V playing fields, Northaw Road East, Cuffley, Hertfordshire, the Heritage Network was commissioned by the owners to undertake an archaeological field evaluation following the results of a desk-based assessment and a geophysical survey. This work was in advance of a planning application to the local planning authority for a housing development. Twenty three trenches were excavated across the site, revealing only two late post-medieval hedgerow field boundaries located in four of the trenches, which correspond with the results of a previous geophysical survey undertaken and the results of historical mapping. No other archaeological finds, features or deposits were present in any of the trial trenches. The site appears to have been under cultivation for most of its history which would explain the lack of archaeological density. Additionally, the effects of ploughing may have destroyed evidence of any earlier archaeological features on the site. On the basis of the results of the evaluation, the risk that the proposed development might disturb significant archaeological remains may be considered to be Low for all periods prior to the post-medieval period and moderate to High for remains of the post-medieval and modern date. However, the importance of any such features should they be encountered may be regarded as 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".