A locally-adaptive model of archaeological potential (LAMAP)

Carleton, W. Christopher; Conolly, James; Ianonne, Gyles

doi:10.1016/j.jas.2012.05.022

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 44 publications

(53 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Every cell in the study area was compared to those cells in a 1 km diameter CSA area around each known-site. The size was chosen to be consistent with previous LAMAP case studies [ 16 , 19 ]. However, we also think that it represents a reasonable scale of landscape decision-making for hunter-gatherers engaged in a range of potential activities.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With these problems in mind, Carleton et al [ 16 ] developed an alternate approach to predicting archaeological potential called the Locally-Adaptive Model of Archaeological Potential or LAMAP. An algorithm rather than single model, LAMAP differs from existing methods in that it does not depend on having ‘non-site locations’ to make predictions and does not treat archaeological sites like points on a map.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…LAMAP has been described in detail in two earlier publications [ 16 , 18 ]. Briefly, the model’s key assumption is that known-site locations can provide us with insight regarding the geographic and ecological characteristics of places used by people in the past.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Does the Locally-Adaptive Model of Archaeological Potential (LAMAP) work for hunter-gatherer sites? A test using data from the Tanana Valley, Alaska

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report an assessment of the ability of the Locally-Adaptive Model of Archaeological Potential (LAMAP) to estimate archaeological potential in relation to hunter-gatherer sites. The sample comprised 182 known sites in the Tanana Valley, Alaska, which was occupied solely by hunter-gatherers for about 14,500 years. To estimate archaeological potential, we employed physiographic variables such as elevation and slope, rather than variables that are known to vary on short time scales, like vegetation cover. Two tests of LAMAP were carried out. In the first, we used the location of a random selection of 90 sites from all time periods to create a LAMAP model. We then evaluated the model with the remaining 92 sites. In the second test, we built a LAMAP model from 12 sites that pre-date 10,000 cal BP. This model was then tested with sites that post-date 10,000 cal BP. In both analyses, areas predicted to have higher archaeological potential contained higher frequencies of validation sites. The performance of LAMAP in the two tests was comparable to its performance in previous tests using archaeological sites occupied by agricultural societies. Thus, the study extends the use of LAMAP to the task of estimating archaeological potential of landscapes in relation to hunter-gatherer sites.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does the Locally-Adaptive Model of Archaeological Potential (LAMAP) work for hunter-gatherer sites? A test using data from the Tanana Valley, Alaska

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The resulting models are then computed, analyzed, and displayed within a GIS environment. Over time, archaeological predictive models have undergone continuous refinement, progressing from binary logistic regression [88,[99][100][101][102][103], LAMAP (locally adaptive model of archaeological potential) [104], spatial autocorrelation methods [105,106], and the maximum entropy model [102,107] to the machine learning approach [108,109]. These advancements have significantly enhanced the accuracy of site prediction models, offering invaluable decision support for archaeological research.…”

Section: • Gis In Archaeologymentioning

confidence: 99%

An Overview of GIS-RS Applications for Archaeological and Cultural Heritage under the DBAR-Heritage Mission

Yao,

Wang,

Luo

et al. 2023

Remote Sensing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent decades, the application of GIS and RS in archaeological and cultural heritage (ACH) has witnessed a notable surge both in terms of quantity and scope. During the initial implementation period (2016–2021) of the Digital Belt and Road Heritage (DBAR-Heritage) working group, several instances of GIS-RS-based applications in support of cultural heritage conservation have merged. In this paper, in order to discuss the great potential of GIS and RS on the Silk Road, an overview of GIS- and RS-based applications in ACH is first presented. In a substantial portion of the published scientific literature, the identification and comprehension of archaeological sites, the monitoring and risk assessment of cultural heritage, and the management and visualization of cultural heritage data are highlighted. Following this, five illustrative case studies from the DBAR-Heritage working group are presented to exemplify how the integration of GIS and RS serves as key approaches in recognizing and appreciating cultural heritage. These selected case studies showcase the utilization of multi-source data for the identification of linear sites; detailed, refined monitoring and assessment of the Angkor Wat heritage; and the reconstruction of the Silk Road routes. These instances serve as the cornerstone for highlighting current trends in GIS and RS applications in ACH along the Silk Road. These methodologies efficiently integrate multi-source geospatial data and employ multidisciplinary approaches, ultimately furnishing sophisticated and intelligent tools for the exploration and management of archaeological and cultural heritage in the era of Big Earth Data. Subsequently, a comprehensive discussion on the merits and challenges of GIS and RS applications in ACH is presented, followed by an exploration of the current application trends. Finally, the prospects for the widespread application of GIS and RS in ACH along the Silk Road are outlined in accordance with the operational plan of DBAR-Heritage during its second implementation phase.

show abstract

“…This is justified by the argument that the proportion of sites compared to non-sites is very small, and thus the prevalence of non-sites will be very similar to such a random or uniform distribution (Kvamme, 1988). Carleton, Conolly, and Iannone (2012) and Carleton et al (2017) instead defined the notion of archaeological potential as 'the relative suitability of different land parcels within a confined region for human occupation', a measure that can be estimated from site presence-only data. A similar concept is applied for expert-judgment based predictive models in the Netherlands (see Van Leusen & Kamermans, 2005), but these do not include quantitative estimations.…”

Section: The Lamap Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictive Spatial Modelling

Verhagen¹,

Whitley

2020

Archaeological Spatial Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

show abstract

A locally-adaptive model of archaeological potential (LAMAP)

Cited by 15 publications

References 44 publications

Does the Locally-Adaptive Model of Archaeological Potential (LAMAP) work for hunter-gatherer sites? A test using data from the Tanana Valley, Alaska

Does the Locally-Adaptive Model of Archaeological Potential (LAMAP) work for hunter-gatherer sites? A test using data from the Tanana Valley, Alaska

An Overview of GIS-RS Applications for Archaeological and Cultural Heritage under the DBAR-Heritage Mission

Predictive Spatial Modelling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About