MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7155167910 · doi:10.5284/1141266

Geophysical Survey (Magnetic) Report, Haisthorpe WTW, East Yorkshire

2025· article· en· W7155167910 on OpenAlexaff
Abi Calvert

Bibliographic record

VenueArchaeology Data Service · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeophysical surveyExcavationDitchMagnetic surveySettlement (finance)Aerial surveySeismic surveySurvey methodology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A geophysical survey (magnetometer) was conducted on land around Haisthorpe WTW, East Yorkshire, in advance of intended expansion. The survey involved traversing the survey area with a Sensys push-cart, with 5 probes mounted, 0.5m apart, and high precision GPS unit. The survey was carried out successfully and revealed several anomalies of archaeological and possible archaeological origin, both previously known and unknown. Archaeological anomalies located within the north-eastern section of the surveyed area may relate to a prior excavation in 2009-2010 which revealed an Iron Age to Romano-British ditched enclosure and possible related pits which extend north out of the survey area to include further settlement activity. Previously unknown archaeological activity was revealed by the magnetometry survey south of the settlement and includes two parallel linear anomalies which could represent a road or track lined by two ditches and a further linear anomaly which bisects the parallel features, also possibly a ditch relating to a later phase of the settlement.

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 score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.906

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.006

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchaeology Data ServiceSame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207