Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. This project dealt with the phonetic details of intonation in Dutch and English. It focused on the alignment of intonational targets (e.g. local peaks and valleys) with the vowels and consonants in speech. Limited past research had suggested that this is systematic, but the factors that affect it are not well understood. The depositor's earlier research suggested that in many cases intonation targets are anchored to specific sounds (e.g. the beginning of the vowel following a stressed syllable). This kind of precision was rather unexpected, because investigators have concentrated on more variable effects (e.g. the closer a target is to the end of a word, the earlier it is aligned). The main goal of this project was to determine how general this anchoring is, what kind of landmarks (consonants, vowels, word ends, etc.) can serve as anchors, and how much the alignment of anchored targets can be affected by more variable factors. One practical motivation for this research was to provide the basic knowledge for improvements to synthetic speech. Most of the empirical research of the proposed project consisted of experiments in both English and Dutch, in which carefully selected sentences were read aloud and detailed acoustical measurements made of the speech. The depositor also studied short (5-10 minute) dialogues spoken under somewhat controlled conditions these are the Map Task dialogues deposited in this dataset. English and Dutch were chosen because their sound structures are similar enough that conclusions can be generalised from one language to the other, yet different enough that certain kinds of experimental controls can be used in one language which would be impossible in the other. Also, both languages support important speech technology industries. Main Topics: This corpus of natural Dutch conversation was collected as part of a project primarily concerned with the phonology and phonetics of intonation. The Map Task procedure for collecting spontaneous speech was used. The Map Task is a widely used tool in the study of dialogue, because it allows researchers to study conversations which are completely spontaneous and yet remarkably predictable and consistent. The task works as follows: the two participants to the conversation each have a map showing a variety of pictured landmarks with names like shepherd's hut or Green Mountain. The maps may differ slightly in detail; crucially, one map (the instruction giver's map) has a route marked on it; and the other (the instruction follower's map) does not. Neither speaker can see the other's map, and in some versions of the task (but not this one) the speakers cannot see each other. The task is for the instruction giver to explain to the instruction follower where the route passes, referring to the various landmarks along the way, accurately enough that the instruction follower can reproduce the route on his or her own map. The basic reference on the Map Task is Anderson et al, (1991), The HCRC Map Task Corpus, Language and Speech 34, 351-366. Further information on the Map Task is available at: http://www.hcrc.ed.ac.uk/dialogue/maptask.html The point of using the Map Task was to obtain natural productions of certain intonation patterns (e.g. various kinds of question intonation) which are difficult to obtain in reading experiments without explicitly instructing the speakers how to speak (and sometimes not even then). The most important manipulation of the maps was to select landmark names that manifested the phonological structures that the depositor was interested in, and that contained consonant types which would permit easy analysis of pitch patterns. However, the basic conversational task was unaffected by these manipulations, and conversations in the corpus are entirely comparable to those recorded in various languages elsewhere. So far as the depositor is aware, no other Map Task corpus exists in Dutch. The conversations were recorded at the phonetics laboratory of the University of Nijmegan on 5 February 1999 (day 1) and 8 February 1999 (day 2). In both cases a complete quad (4 speakers, 8 conversations) was recorded. The speakers were all students at the university. The maps were based on maps from the original HCRC Map Task. The distribution of the landmarks and the route on the giver's map were identical to the originals, but the actual names of the landmarks were in Dutch and in most cases the pictures had to be adapted as well.
https://historicengland.org.uk/terms/website-terms-conditions/open-data-hub/https://historicengland.org.uk/terms/website-terms-conditions/open-data-hub/
Historic buildings and archaeological sites of national importance are given legal protection by being placed on a ‘Schedule’ of monuments. Historic England identifies and advises on these monuments, which are placed on the Schedule by the DCMS. Examples of Scheduled Monuments are Roman remains, burial mounds, castles, bridges, earthworks, the remains of deserted villages, and industrial sites. Scheduled Monuments can not include ecclesiastical or residential buildings (except for associated caretaker’s dwellings), and unlike Listed Buildings they are not assigned grades.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
This data shows records of Archaeological and Historical Sites and Monuments within the area covered by the modern county of Lincolnshire, and has been extracted from the Lincolnshire Historic Environment Record (HER), Lincolnshire County Council. Any use of the data should acknowledge this as the source. The data is for information purposes only and should not be used in any commercial sense or as evidence to form any decisions relating to the Historic Environment. Whilst every reasonable attempt has been made to maintain the accuracy of the data, there are no guarantees as to the accuracy of any of the information. The data is compiled from diverse sources on an ongoing basis. This data should not be used for any purposes that damage, or could lead to damage to, archaeological sites, historic buildings and landscapes. The inclusion of an archaeological feature in the data does not imply any right of public access to that archaeological feature. This data is an extract of detailed records from the HER. If you have any questions about the data or would like to find out further information about the Historic Environment in Lincolnshire, please contact lincssmr@lincolnshire.gov.uk or visit the website at the Source link (below). (Please note that for technical reasons two fields are currently blank in the dataset. The problem is being addressed). Please note in map publications using this data (or data derived from it), this Ordnance Survey copyright statement must be shown: Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right [year].
This dataset is published as Open DataScheduled MonumentsThis dataset comprises scheduled monuments in Scotland.Scheduled monuments are nationally important monuments and sites. National importance takes account of a wide range of factors, including artistic, archaeological, architectural, historic, traditional, aesthetic, scientific and social. The aim of scheduling is to preserve sites and monuments as far as possible in the form in which they have come down to us today.https://inspire.hes.scot/arcgis/services/HES/HES_Designations/MapServer/WFSServer?request=GetCapabilities&service=WFS
The Bristol Historic Environment Record (HER) Monuments dataset provides details of over 3000 archaeological and historic structures (designated and undesignated) within the administrative area of Bristol City Council. These monuments have been recorded from historic records, archaeological reports or site observations. Also available as a map service layer - fully attributed dataset as JSON
Xverum’s Location Data is a highly structured dataset of 230M+ verified locations, covering businesses, landmarks, and points of interest (POI) across 5000 industry categories. With accurate geographic coordinates, business metadata, and mapping attributes, our dataset is optimized for GIS applications, real estate analysis, market research, and urban planning.
With continuous discovery of new locations and regular updates, Xverum ensures that your location intelligence solutions have the most current data on business openings, closures, and POI movements. Delivered in bulk via S3 Bucket or cloud storage, our dataset integrates seamlessly into mapping, navigation, and geographic analysis platforms.
🔥 Key Features:
Comprehensive Location Coverage: ✅ 230M+ locations worldwide, spanning 5000 business categories. ✅ Includes retail stores, corporate offices, landmarks, service providers & more.
Geographic & Mapping Data: ✅ Latitude & longitude coordinates for precise location tracking. ✅ Country, state, city, and postal code classifications. ✅ Business status tracking – Open, temporarily closed, permanently closed.
Continuous Discovery & Regular Updates: ✅ New locations added frequently to ensure fresh data. ✅ Updated business metadata, reflecting new openings, closures & status changes.
Detailed Business & Address Metadata: ✅ Company name, category, & subcategories for industry segmentation. ✅ Business contact details, including phone number & website (if available). ✅ Operating hours for businesses with scheduling data.
Optimized for Mapping & Location Intelligence: ✅ Supports GIS, real estate analysis & smart city planning. ✅ Enhances navigation & mapping solutions with structured geographic data. ✅ Helps businesses optimize site selection & expansion strategies.
Bulk Data Delivery (NO API): ✅ Delivered via S3 Bucket or cloud storage for full dataset access. ✅ Available in a structured format (.json) for easy integration.
🏆 Primary Use Cases:
Location Intelligence & Mapping: 🔹 Power GIS platforms & digital maps with structured geographic data. 🔹 Integrate accurate location insights into real estate, logistics & market analysis.
Retail Expansion & Business Planning: 🔹 Identify high-traffic locations & competitors for strategic site selection. 🔹 Analyze brand distribution & presence across different industries & regions.
Market Research & Competitive Analysis: 🔹 Track openings, closures & business density to assess industry trends. 🔹 Benchmark competitors based on location data & geographic presence.
Smart City & Infrastructure Planning: 🔹 Optimize city development projects with accurate POI & business location data. 🔹 Support public & commercial zoning strategies with real-world business insights.
💡 Why Choose Xverum’s Location Data? - 230M+ Verified Locations – One of the largest & most structured location datasets available. - Global Coverage – Spanning 249+ countries, with diverse business & industry data. - Regular Updates – Continuous discovery & refresh cycles ensure data accuracy. - Comprehensive Geographic & Business Metadata – Coordinates, addresses, industry categories & more. - Bulk Dataset Delivery (NO API) – Seamless access via S3 Bucket or cloud storage. - 100% Compliant – Ethically sourced & legally compliant.
Access Xverum’s 230M+ Location Data for mapping, geographic analysis & business intelligence. Request a free sample or contact us to customize your dataset today!
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Sheffield Primary School Catchment Boundaries for the academic year 2023 - 2024. Please note that school catchment areas in Sheffield are legally defined in terms of postcodes and street numbers, not by landmarks; as such, the boundary indicated on this map is merely an illustration of the area in question.
https://historicengland.org.uk/terms/website-terms-conditions/open-data-hub/https://historicengland.org.uk/terms/website-terms-conditions/open-data-hub/
‘Listing’ is the all-encompassing term for the legal protection given to a building, monument, structure or site through the planning system. It is recognition of historical, architectural or archaeological significance, intended to ensure that the character of the asset in question is preserved for future generations. The main types of Listing are:
Listed Buildings Scheduled Monuments Registered Parks and Gardens Registered Battlefields Protected Wreck Sites World Heritage Sites
Data is updated daily. Further details are available on our website here - https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/
Historic England Open Data Hub - https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/open-data-hub/
Field descriptions Listed BuildingsPolygons are available for listed buildings listed or substantively amended since 4th April 2011.
Field name
Field alias
Description
List Entry
List entry number
Unique reference number from the National Heritage List for England
Name
Name
Name of building
Grade
Grade
Grade of building; in descending order of importance: I, II*,II
ListDate
Listing date
Date on which the building was added to the Statutory List of Buildings
AmendDate
Amendment date
Date on which the listing was last amended
CaptureScale
Capture scale
Scale at which the spatial representation of that listed building was captured
hyperlink
NHLE link
URL of the record on the Historic England website
area_ha
Area (ha)
Area of the polygon in hectares Polygon layer only; only populated where building footprint has been mapped
NGR
National Grid Reference
Ordnance Survey national grid reference of centroid
Easting
Easting
Centroid easting
Northing
Northing
Centroid northing
Building Preservation Notices
Field name
Field alias
Description
List Entry
List entry number
Unique reference number from the National Heritage List for England
Name
Name
Name of building
BPNStart
Building Preservation Notice start date
Start date of the notice
BPNExpire
Building Preservation Notice expiry date
Expiry date of the notice
CaptureScale
Capture scale
Scale at which the spatial representation of that building preservation notice was captured
hyperlink
NHLE link
URL of the record on the Historic England website
area_ha
Area (ha)
Area of the polygon in hectares Polygon layer only
NGR
National Grid Reference
Ordnance Survey national grid reference of centroid
Easting
Easting
Centroid easting
Northing
Northing
Centroid northing
Certificates of Immunity
Field name
Field alias
Description
List Entry
List entry number
Unique reference number from the National Heritage List for England
Name
Name
Name of building
COIStart
Certificate of Immunity start date
Start date of the certificate
COIExpire
Certificate of Immunity expiry date
Expiry date of the certificate
CaptureScale
Capture scale
Scale at which the spatial representation of that certificate of immunity was captured
hyperlink
NHLE link
URL of the record on the Historic England website
area_ha
Area (ha)
Area of the polygon in hectares Polygon layer only
NGR
National Grid Reference
Ordnance Survey national grid reference of centroid
Easting
Easting
Centroid easting
Northing
Northing
Centroid northing
Scheduled Monuments
Field name
Field alias
Description
List Entry
List entry number
Unique reference number from the National Heritage List for England
Name
Name
Statutory registered title of monument
SchedDate
Schedule date
Date on which the monument was included in the Schedule of Monuments
AmendDate
Amendment date
Date on which the scheduling was last amended
CaptureScale
Capture scale
Scale at which the spatial representation of that scheduled monument was captured
hyperlink
NHLE link
URL of the record on the Historic England website
area_ha
Area (ha)
Area
NGR
National Grid Reference
Ordnance Survey national grid reference of centroid
Easting
Easting
Centroid easting
Northing
Northing
Centroid northing
Registered Parks and Gardens
Field name
Field alias
Description
List Entry
List entry number
Unique reference number from the National Heritage List for England
Name
Name
Registered title of park and garden
Grade
Grade
Grade of park and garden; in descending order of importance: I, II*, II
RegDate
Registration date
Date on which the park and garden was included in the Register of Historic Parks and Gardens
AmendDate
Amendment date
Date on which the registration was last amended
CaptureScale
Capture scale
Scale at which the spatial representation of that park and garden was captured
hyperlink
NHLE link
URL of the record on the Historic England website
area_ha
Area (ha)
Area of the polygon in hectares
NGR
National Grid Reference
Ordnance Survey national grid reference of centroid
Easting
Easting
Centroid easting
Northing
Northing
Centroid northing
Registered Battlefields
Field name
Field alias
Description
List Entry
List entry number
Unique reference number from the National Heritage List for England
Name
Name
Registered title of battlefield
RegDate
Registration date
Date on which the battlefield was included in the Register of Historic Battlefields
AmendDate
Amendment date
Date on which the registration was last amended
CaptureScale
Capture scale
Scale at which the spatial representation of that battlefield was captured
hyperlink
NHLE link
URL of the record on the Historic England website
area_ha
Area (ha)
Area of the polygon in hectares
NGR
National Grid Reference
Ordnance Survey national grid reference of centroid
Easting
Easting
Centroid easting
Northing
Northing
Centroid northing
Protected Wreck Sites
Field name
Field alias
Description
List Entry
List entry number
Unique reference number from the National Heritage List for England
Name
Name
Name of wreck site
DesigDate
Designation date
Date on which the wreck site was designated as a restricted area
AmendDate
Amendment date
Date on which the designation was last amended
CaptureScale
Capture scale
Scale at which the spatial representation of that protected wreck was captured
hyperlink
NHLE link
URL of the record on the Historic England website
area_ha
Area (ha)
Area of the polygon in hectares
NGR
National Grid Reference
Ordnance Survey national grid reference of centroid
Latitude
Latitude
Latitude in decimal degrees (WGS84)
Longitude
Longitude
Longitude in decimal degrees (WGS84)
World Heritage Sites
Field name
Field alias
Description
List Entry
List entry number
Unique reference number from the National Heritage List for England
Name
Name
Title of world heritage property
InscrDate
Inscription date
Date on which the property was inscribed on the World Heritage List by UNESCO
AmendDate
Amendment date
Date on which the inscription was last amended
Notes
Notes
Denotes if polygon is Property Boundary (noted as Core Area) or Buffer Zone
CaptureScale
Capture scale
Scale at which the spatial representation of that World Heritage Site was captured
hyperlink
NHLE link
URL of the record on the Historic England website
area_ha
Area (ha)
Area of the polygon in hectares
NGR
National Grid Reference
Ordnance Survey national grid reference of centroid
Easting
Not seeing a result you expected?
Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.
Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. This project dealt with the phonetic details of intonation in Dutch and English. It focused on the alignment of intonational targets (e.g. local peaks and valleys) with the vowels and consonants in speech. Limited past research had suggested that this is systematic, but the factors that affect it are not well understood. The depositor's earlier research suggested that in many cases intonation targets are anchored to specific sounds (e.g. the beginning of the vowel following a stressed syllable). This kind of precision was rather unexpected, because investigators have concentrated on more variable effects (e.g. the closer a target is to the end of a word, the earlier it is aligned). The main goal of this project was to determine how general this anchoring is, what kind of landmarks (consonants, vowels, word ends, etc.) can serve as anchors, and how much the alignment of anchored targets can be affected by more variable factors. One practical motivation for this research was to provide the basic knowledge for improvements to synthetic speech. Most of the empirical research of the proposed project consisted of experiments in both English and Dutch, in which carefully selected sentences were read aloud and detailed acoustical measurements made of the speech. The depositor also studied short (5-10 minute) dialogues spoken under somewhat controlled conditions these are the Map Task dialogues deposited in this dataset. English and Dutch were chosen because their sound structures are similar enough that conclusions can be generalised from one language to the other, yet different enough that certain kinds of experimental controls can be used in one language which would be impossible in the other. Also, both languages support important speech technology industries. Main Topics: This corpus of natural Dutch conversation was collected as part of a project primarily concerned with the phonology and phonetics of intonation. The Map Task procedure for collecting spontaneous speech was used. The Map Task is a widely used tool in the study of dialogue, because it allows researchers to study conversations which are completely spontaneous and yet remarkably predictable and consistent. The task works as follows: the two participants to the conversation each have a map showing a variety of pictured landmarks with names like shepherd's hut or Green Mountain. The maps may differ slightly in detail; crucially, one map (the instruction giver's map) has a route marked on it; and the other (the instruction follower's map) does not. Neither speaker can see the other's map, and in some versions of the task (but not this one) the speakers cannot see each other. The task is for the instruction giver to explain to the instruction follower where the route passes, referring to the various landmarks along the way, accurately enough that the instruction follower can reproduce the route on his or her own map. The basic reference on the Map Task is Anderson et al, (1991), The HCRC Map Task Corpus, Language and Speech 34, 351-366. Further information on the Map Task is available at: http://www.hcrc.ed.ac.uk/dialogue/maptask.html The point of using the Map Task was to obtain natural productions of certain intonation patterns (e.g. various kinds of question intonation) which are difficult to obtain in reading experiments without explicitly instructing the speakers how to speak (and sometimes not even then). The most important manipulation of the maps was to select landmark names that manifested the phonological structures that the depositor was interested in, and that contained consonant types which would permit easy analysis of pitch patterns. However, the basic conversational task was unaffected by these manipulations, and conversations in the corpus are entirely comparable to those recorded in various languages elsewhere. So far as the depositor is aware, no other Map Task corpus exists in Dutch. The conversations were recorded at the phonetics laboratory of the University of Nijmegan on 5 February 1999 (day 1) and 8 February 1999 (day 2). In both cases a complete quad (4 speakers, 8 conversations) was recorded. The speakers were all students at the university. The maps were based on maps from the original HCRC Map Task. The distribution of the landmarks and the route on the giver's map were identical to the originals, but the actual names of the landmarks were in Dutch and in most cases the pictures had to be adapted as well.