MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7165402107 · doi:10.5284/1143633

St. Catherine's Church, Sacombe Archival Report

2015· article· en· W7165402107 on OpenAlexaff
G Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueArchaeology Data Service · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Heritage
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcavationBedrockSiltTopsoilCalcareniteHuman bone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Heritage Network was commissioned by Mike Dales Partnership Ltd to undertake a programme of archaeological monitoring during groundworks at St Catherine's Church, Sacombe, Hertfordshire. The groundworks consisted of the excavation of a soakaway pit, 1.4m by 1.4m wide by 1.4m deep. Two drain run trenches were also excavated from the north of the church and the corner of the north porch, 8m and 5m north-east and north-west respectively, to the soakaway (Figure 2, Plate 2). The groundworks revealed a sequence of chalk bedrock overlain by 0.35m of greyish brown sandy silt graveyard soil with frequent chalk fragments, sealed below a 0.20m thick layer of topsoil and turf. Within the soakaway, two human burials were encountered, [101] and [102]. The edges of both of these burials were clipped but no human skeletal remains were encountered from within the fills (sections 1 and 2, Plates 2 and 3). A small quantity of human bone was recovered from the graveyard soil, including fragments of long bone, as well as numerous small fragments that could not be identified. A brief assessment showed that the material was disarticulated remains from several individuals. Photographs were taken of the best preserved and most identifiable bones. The bone was retained on site for re-burial.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0920.015

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchaeology Data ServiceSame topicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207