Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35947537›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Machine learning for stone artifact identification: Distinguishing worked stone artifacts from natural clasts using deep neural networks.

Joshua Emmitt, Sina Masoud-Ansari, Rebecca Phillipps, Stacey Middleton, Jennifer Graydon, Simon Holdaway

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Joshua EmmittSchool of Social Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-1224-200X
Sina Masoud-AnsariCentre for eResearch, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Rebecca PhillippsSchool of Social Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Stacey MiddletonSchool of Social Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0001-7812-0369
Jennifer GraydonSchool of Social Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-1282-4715
Simon HoldawaySchool of Social Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

ArtifactsNeural Networks, ComputerArchaeologyHumansMachine LearningTechnology

Identifiers

PMID35947537
PMCPMC9365149

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.