Using Dynamic Image Analysis as a Method for Discerning Microdebitage from Natural Soils in Archaeological Soil Samples
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11380698 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Phyllis S Johnson (0000-0001-9826-6189, Vanderbilt University, corresponding author), M Eberl (0000-0002-3260-5405, Vanderbilt University), Michael Mcbride (0000-0002-5274-7275, Hill Country Archeological Association, Kerrville, TX, USA), Rebecca Estrada Aguila (Vanderbilt University) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 46 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 111-118 |
| Publication date | 2021-04-03 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Lithic Technology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0197-7261 • E-ISSN: 2051-6185 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/01977261.2020.1860351 |
| OpenAlex | W3119081897 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
| References cited | 28 |
Unlike larger stone tools and debitage, the analysis of microdebitage (measuring less than 6 mm) allows for identifying likely areas where stone tools were manufactured at prehistoric archaeological sites. The tedious, time-consuming, and costly nature of microdebitage, however, has overshadowed its data potential, making most archaeologists wary of implementing this method. To alleviate these issues, this study introduces an experimental protocol using Dynamic Image Analysis (DIA) as a potential method for differentiating between microdebitage and natural soils within archaeological soil samples. In this study, a particle analyzer was employed to test whether microdebitage can be quantifiably identified within archaeological soil samples without the need for flotation and manual sorting. The results of the Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) test demonstrate significant differences (p < 0.001) between the lithic and soil datasets, indicating that DIA is a viable and promising method for differentiating between microdebitage and natural soils within archaeological soil samples
Archaeology · Geography · Natural (archaeology · Prehistory · Silt · Soil test · Soil water · Sorting · Computer Science · Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping · Image Processing and 3D Reconstruction · Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology · Geology · Paleontology · Soil Science
Ethical and environmental considerations for the application of Artificial Intelligence in archaeological research
Middle holocene burial and cultural dynamics at the liang sumpang Karoro 1 site, Maros, Indonesia
Sampling Matters
Machine Learning–Based Identification of Lithic Microdebitage
Macrodebitage Writ Small? Studying Stoneknapping with Experimental Archaeology, Dynamic Image Analysis, and Statistics
Studying lithic microdebitage with a dynamic image particle analyzer
Using tiny artifacts to answer big questions
Redefining lithic microdebitage with experimental archaeology
Microartifacts
Modernizing Spatial Micro-Refuse Analysis
Quantifying Postdepositional Redistribution of the Archaeological Record Produced by Freeze–Thaw and Other Mechanisms
Theoretical issues in the interpretation of microartifacts
Quantifying microartifacts using a personal computer
Artifact size and spatial process
It is the little things that count
Microartifact Analysis
Taphonomy and the role of experimentation in microartifact analysis
In much smaller things forgotten
Scaling Up, Scaling Down
Microartifact Analysis and Site Formation of a Mississippian House Floor at Wickliffe Mounds, Kentucky
Microdebitage analysis
A Comparative Evaluation of Four Sampling Techniques and of the Reliability of Microdebitage As A Cultural Indicator in Regional Surveys
No Stone Unburned
Elite Household Multicrafting Specialization at 9N8, Patio H, Copan
Flake Concentrations
Another Look at Small Debitage and Microdebitage
Identification of Cultural Site Formation Processes through Microdebitage Analysis
Site Structure of the Orbit Inn
Microrefuse and Site Structure
Ancient Town and City Sites
A Comment on Microdebitage Analyses and Cultural Site-Formation Processes among Tipi Dwellers
| Unique citing works | 8 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 2 |
| Citation span | 2022 - 2026 (5) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 7 |