ArticleScientific reports2025
Classifying polish in use-wear analysis with convolutional neural networks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Identification of heat-treated lithic artifacts via quantitative surface gloss characterization.Scientific reports · 2026Article
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
Lithic use-wear analysis examines micro- and macroscopic traces on tool surfaces resulting from human use and post-depositional processes. Polish, formed through surface abrasion with different materials, is a key diagnostic feature that is increasingly analyzed using machine learning to enhance automation and standardization. However, further research is needed to explore whether deep learning approaches, in particular, can be effectively applied to use-wear analysis and to determine the optimal surface area size (e.g., patch size and microscope objectives) and model architecture (custom vs. pre-trained) for achieving the best results. This study employs convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to classify experimental polish based on contact material (wood, hide, bone) and use intensity, while also assessing optimal imaging and analytical parameters. The results of this exploratory study suggest that CNNs may effectively identify polish from bone and hide but perform less effectively with wood. The models also successfully distinguish between polish formed by short- and long-term use. Custom models outperformed pre-trained ones, particularly when using images that captured smaller areas of the tool's surface, suggesting that bigger surface areas may lack the necessary information for optimal results. These findings underscore the need to expand use-wear datasets in terms of size and variability and optimize CNN architectures and workflows.
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.