ArticlePloS one2022
Pedigree-based Bayesian modelling of radiocarbon dates.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A refined phylochronology of the second plague pandemic in Western Eurasia.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Article
- Accurate detection of identity-by-descent segments in human ancient DNA.Nature genetics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Within the last decade, archaeogenetic analysis has revolutionized archaeological research and enabled novel insights into mobility, relatedness and health of past societies. Now, it is possible to develop these results further and integrate archaeogenetic insights into biological relatedness with radiocarbon dates as means of chronologically sequenced information. In our article, we demonstrate the potential of combining relative chronological information with absolute radiocarbon dates by Bayesian interpretation in order to improve age determinations. Using artificial pedigrees with four sets of simulated radiocarbon dates we show that the combination of relationship information with radiocarbon dates improves the age determination in many cases at least between 20 to 50%. Calibrated age ranges are more constrained than simply calibrating radiocarbon ages independently from each other. Thereby, the precision of modelled ages depends on the precision of the single radiocarbon dates, the number of modelled generations, the shape of the calibration curve and the availability of samples that can be precisely fixed in time due to specific patterns in the calibration curve ("anchor points"). Ambiguous calibrated radiocarbon dates, which are caused by inversions of the calibration curve, can be partly or almost entirely resolved through Bayesian modelling based upon information from pedigrees. Finally, we discuss selected case studies of biological pedigrees achieved for Early Bronze Age Southern Germany by recent archaeogenetic analysis, whereby the sites and pedigrees differ with regard to the quality of information, which can be used for a Bayesian model of the radiocarbon dates. In accordance with the abstract models, radiocarbon dates can again be better constrained and are therefore more applicable for archaeological interpretation and chronological placement of the dated individuals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.