2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.jasrep.2016.06.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A new method for accurately and precisely measuring flake platform area

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is something Birds and Rhoads recognise (p. 128), but it may impact their results more than they realise. Indeed, Muller and Clarkson (2016) found similar results with flake platforms, where rectangles drastically over-estimated size in only two dimensions. A division of these two values (latter/former) is used by Bird and Rhoads to generate the estimated number of nodules responsible for assemblage production.…”
supporting
confidence: 64%
“…This is something Birds and Rhoads recognise (p. 128), but it may impact their results more than they realise. Indeed, Muller and Clarkson (2016) found similar results with flake platforms, where rectangles drastically over-estimated size in only two dimensions. A division of these two values (latter/former) is used by Bird and Rhoads to generate the estimated number of nodules responsible for assemblage production.…”
supporting
confidence: 64%
“…This ongoing work largely established the hierarchical importance of platform dimensions and exterior platform angle in driving size variation, relative to the lesser effects of some other variables. However, when these controlled experimental results are applied to actual archaeological assemblages, there remains a significant amount of unexplained variability, particularly when assemblages are considered on a flake by flake basis (Dogandžić et al 2015;Muller and Clarkson 2014;Muller and Clarkson 2016). While it is possible that this unexplained variability in the archaeological record is a result of measurement error on certain key variables (i.e.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, digital recording methods like two-and three-dimensional (2D and 3D) photogrammetry have markedly improved our ability to morphometrically compare experimental lithic specimens (Eren et al 2008;Grosman 2016;Heighway 2011;Muller and Clarkson 2016a;Sumner and Riddle 2008). Finally, the application of 3D scanning to lithic technology and experimentation is a burgeoning technique which has improved our ability to accurately measure lithic attributes (Clarkson 2013;Clarkson and Hiscock 2011;Clarkson et al 2014;Grosman 2016;Grosman et al 2014;Lin et al 2010;Muller and Clarkson 2014;2016b;Richardson et al 2014;Sholts et al 2012;Shott and Trail 2010;Zaidner and Grosman 2015) and make comprehensive analyses of complex technologies (Archer and Braun 2010;Grosman et al 2011a;Grosman et al 2011b;Grosman et al 2008;Li et al 2015;Shipton 2016;Shipton and Clarkson 2015a;2015b). These methods, among others, contribute to increasing the precision and accuracy of lithic experimentation, in part addressing the concerns raised by critics.…”
Section: Addressing Criticisms: Hypothesis Testing and Recent Trendsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As was discussed in Chapter 2, the use of 2D and 3D photogrammetry and geometric morphometrics have increasingly played a role in lithic experimentation (Archer and Braun 2010;Clarkson 2013;Clarkson and Hiscock 2011;Grosman 2016;Grosman et al 2011a;Grosman et al 2014;Grosman et al 2011b;Grosman et al 2008;Li et al 2015;Lin et al 2010;Muller and Clarkson 2014;2016b;Richardson et al 2014;Shipton 2016;Shipton and Clarkson 2015a;2015b;Sholts et al 2012;Shott and Trail 2010;Zaidner and Grosman 2015). Undoubtedly, these analyses will only grow more complex with the introduction of more refined 3D methods and the application of machine-learning algorithms to archaeology.…”
Section: Avenues For Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation