## 6 Results and Discussion
### GPR Results  
The position of the sources of the anomalies that appear on the radargram sections must be distinguished from other multiple reflections. Any anomaly in the radargram section should be evaluated in a successive of inline and crossline sections within the area, with the hyperbolas for this anomaly on the radargram sections having the highest amplitude on the section exactly above center of the source of the anomaly and this amplitude will decrease as the center of the source moves outward. A careful examination of radargrams in each grid explained that some 2D sections contain potential targets, while other ones do not contain any important targets, and therefore, they have been neglected in the upcoming description. The result of all radargrams revealed that there are eight potential targets of definite hyperpole of considerable amplitudes that may be related to archaeological features. [20; 29] studied similar sites in Egypt and they interpreted similar anomalies as archeological objected, their results are matching well with our findings. To make this article's length reasonable, only one hyperbola in the grid No. (3) was discussed in detail. Figure 7 shows three successive profiles L63, L64, and L65 during reconnaissance survey which has lengths of 50 m. In each profile, there is a definite hyperbola in the 2D radargram. In line No. 63, the horizontal dimension of this hyperbola begins from the offset 20 m to 31 m with a maximum distance 11 m and the two-way time (TWT) of its top is 30 ns and the depths to its top and bottom are 1.7 m and 3.8 m, respectively, giving an amplitude of 2.1 m. Line 64 reveals the same hyperbola which occurred in line 63 with the same horizontal dimension (11 m) but its amplitude enlarged to be 2.3 m where its top and bottom occurred at depths 1.6 m to 3.9 m. Line 65 showed the hyperbola as in the former lines with the same horizontal dimension (11 m) but its amplitude changed to be 2.1 m where the depth to the top and the bottom are 1.8 m and 3.9 m, respectively. Comparison of the three lines, we can conclude that the highest amplitude of the source body forming this hyperbola occur beneath the line No. 64. This indicates that the center of this source is beneath this location. The amplitude of this anomaly decreases toward the line 63 and 65. The depth to the top of this source is 1.6 m and to the bottom is 3.9 m.  
After inspection of the reconnaissance line No. 63, 64 and 65 which found out presence of an archaeologic object may be a tomb, the detail lines are subtracted to reveal only the dimension of this object. So, 22 inline and crossline profiles were surveyed over this promising location. Figure 8 exhibits three consecutive inline profiles (L27, L28, and L29) of length 15 m and Figure 9 depicts three consecutive crossline profiles (L37, L38, and L39) of length 15 m.  
Figure 7: Radargram sections of three successive lines (L63, L64 and L65) executed on grid No. (3) during reconnaissance survey in Abydos site. Their lengths are 50 m. These sections show presence of the same anomalous feature indicated by the hyperbolic shape mentioned in the blue circle with considerable dimension and amplitude which may indicate an archeological remain (chamber or tomb). Figure 8: Radargram sections of three successive inline profiles (L27, L28 and L29) executed on grid No. (3) during detailed survey in Abydos site. Their lengths are 15 m. These sections show the same hyperbolic shape indicated in the reconnaissance profiles with the same dimension, amplitude and depth. It was shown in the blue circle. Inspection of the inline profiles (L27, L28, and L29), Figure 8 reveals the same conclusion which deduced from the former profiles (L63, 64, and 65) where the depth to the top and the bottom of the source body forming the hyperbola in these profiles is ranging  
Figure 9: Radargram sections of three successive crossline profiles (L37, L38 and L39) executed on grid No. (3) during detailed survey in Abydos site.