## 4 Results
### Wp1--Unsaturated Scenarios
#### 4.1.2 ERT Results in WP1  
As shown in Figure 9, the resistivity values obtained with the use of the 3D-ERTs range between 2 and 200 \(\Omega\)m. The low values of resistivity are due to the presence of a high-water content in the sand while the greater values are induced by the presence of the archaeological remains. The resistivity distribution acquired with the classical 3D ERT configuration is not associated well to the buried archaeological structures, both in the drier scenario (Figure 9a) and the wetter scenario (Figure 9b). On the contrary, the loop-loop array provided an enhanced information regarding their distribution and shape  
Figure 6: Time-slices at the depths of 0.25 m (**a**), 0.45 m (**b**), 0.70 m, and (**c**) 1.00 m (**d**) with a water table at a depth of 1.50 m (WL3). In (**f**) the 3D iso-amplitude volumes obtained selecting only the highest reflections; (**e**) the plane of the test site.  
(Figure 9c,d). In fact, several resistivity anomalies are well detected in the loop-loop 3D ERT image and they clearly highlight the presence of the corner wall (D), the capuchin tomb (F), and enchytrismos (E), as shown in the wetter scenario WL2 (Figure 9d). Less evident is the presence of the other structures that are located at the edges of the investigated area (column A and rectangular tomb B) or at a greater depth, as in the case of the paved road (C).  
The comparison of the results obtained with the two approaches shows the importance of the results obtained with the less conventional loop-loop shaped array, also highlighted by the depth slices extracted in the three different scenarios (Figures 10-12). In detail, the slices extracted at increasing depths from the resistivity model in WL3 (dier scenario) allow to detect at least five of the six structures buried in the subsoil (Figure 10) despite the apparent noise in the shallower layer of the subsoil, induced by the excavation activities and bad compaction of the soil (Figure 10a). Increasing the depth, the presence of the structures is more easily detectable, as in the case of the corner wall (D) and the paved road (C) (Figure 10b,c). At the depth of 1.00 m, no structures are detectable for the scarce resolution of the method imputable to the few measurement points available.  
The results obtained with the water table at the depth of 1.00 m (in WL2) allow to detect a lower noise in the shallowed layers due to the higher water content in the subsoil (Figure 11), resulting in an improved geophysical contrast between the archaeological structures (more resistive) and background soil (more conductive). As in the previous case, apart from the rectangular tomb (B), the electrical anomalies can be associated for position and shape to the buried structures at the depths of 0.25 m (Figure 11a), 0.45 m (Figure 11b), and 0.70 m (Figure 11c).  
Figure 7: Time-slices at the depths of 0.25 m (**a**), 0.45 m (**b**), 0.70 m (**c**), and 1.00 m (**d**) with a water table at a depth of 1.00 m (WL2); (**f**) the 3D iso-amplitude volumes obtained selecting only the highest reflections; (**e**) the plane of the test site.  
Figure 8: Time-slices at a depth of 0.25 m (**a**), 0.45 m (**b**), 0.70 m, (**c**) and 1.00 m (**d**) with a water table 0.20 m (WL1); (**f**) the 3D iso-amplitude volumes obtained selecting only the highest reflecions and in (**e**) the plane of the test site.  
Figure 9: 3D ERTs acquired with the classical dipolar approach (upper figure) and loop–loop array (lower figure) in WL3 (**a**,**c**) and WL2 (**b**,**d**), respectively. The cross section between the horizontal slices and the vertical ones is 0.5 cm.  
In WL1 (Figure 12), the high water content does not permit the identification of electrical anomalies associated to the buried structures in any slices.