2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.jasrep.2018.04.034
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Some problems with modelling the positions of prehistoric hunter-gatherer settlements on the basis of landscape topography

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
24
0
2

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
24
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Purposeful survey for underwater sites has been relatively rare, mainly because of the uncertain chances of finding material relative to the high costs and logistical difficulties of mounting underwater expeditions. Examples of successful prediction and targeting of underwater finds are known, for example, from early work on the American continental shelf using sites and site locations on land to predict locations underwater, followed up by acoustic survey and coring or grab sampling (Dixon and Monteleone 2014;Faught 2004; Fedje and Josenhans 2000; P F ) fishing site model has also proved successful in finding underwater sites in Denmark, though it is not without its limitations (Grøn 2018).…”
Section: Current State Of the Art In Underwater Prehistorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Purposeful survey for underwater sites has been relatively rare, mainly because of the uncertain chances of finding material relative to the high costs and logistical difficulties of mounting underwater expeditions. Examples of successful prediction and targeting of underwater finds are known, for example, from early work on the American continental shelf using sites and site locations on land to predict locations underwater, followed up by acoustic survey and coring or grab sampling (Dixon and Monteleone 2014;Faught 2004; Fedje and Josenhans 2000; P F ) fishing site model has also proved successful in finding underwater sites in Denmark, though it is not without its limitations (Grøn 2018).…”
Section: Current State Of the Art In Underwater Prehistorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whatever the geographical focus, the efficient mapping and recording of submerged Stone Age sites/archaeological sites employing lithic knapping technology constitutes a central archaeological challenge. Submerged cultural deposits may be well preserved and intact if quickly buried, but they may also be difficult to detect and map through surveys focused on identifying bathymetrical/topographical settlement indicators [37][38][39][40]. Therefore, the development of a methodology that can map submerged Stone Age sites directly and efficiently, including buried sites, will represent a significant contribution to underwater archaeology.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to the use of the classic procedure to validate the APM [59] (Equation (2)), we used the area under curvature (AUC). Based on the issues identified by [60] which argues the use of topographical features in APM, we chose to address this issue by using in our modelling just three factors.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%