ArticlePloS one2022
Machine learning for stone artifact identification: Distinguishing worked stone artifacts from natural clasts using deep neural networks.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Museum artifact classification model based on cross-modal attention fusion and generative data augmentation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Advanced pathological subtype classification of thyroid cancer using efficientNetB0.Diagnostic pathology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stone artifacts are often the most abundant class of objects found in archaeological sites but their consistent identification is limited by the number of experienced analysts available. We report a machine learning based technology for stone artifact identification as part of a solution to the lack of such experts directed at distinguishing worked stone objects from naturally occurring lithic clasts. Three case study locations from Egypt, Australia, and New Zealand provide a data set of 6769 2D images, 3868 flaked artifact and 2901 rock images used to train and test a machine learning model based on an openly available PyTorch implementation of Faster R-CNN ResNet 50. Results indicate 100% agreement between the model and original human derived classifications, a better performance than the results achieved independently by two human analysts who reassessed the 2D images available to the machine learning model. Machine learning neural networks provide the potential to consistently assess the composition of large archaeological assemblages composed of objects modified in a variety of ways.
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.