Cited by 67

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A modified Mask region‐based convolutional neural network approach for the automated detection of archaeological sites on high‐resolution light detection and ranging‐derived digital elevation models in the North German Lowland

Bonhage, Alexander, Eltaher, Mahmoud, Raab, Thomas, Breuß, Michael, Raab, Alexandra, Schneider, Anna·2021·Archaeological Prospection

Abstract

Due to complicated backgrounds and unclear target orientation, automated object detection is difficult in the field of archaeology. Most of the current convolutional neural network (CNN) object‐oriented detection techniques are based on a faster region‐based CNN (R‐CNN) and other one‐stage detectors that often lack adequate processing speeds and detection accuracies. Recently, the two‐stage detector Mask R‐CNN technique achieved impressive results in object detection and instance segmentation problems and was successfully applied in the analysis of archaeological airborne laser scanning (ALS) data. In this study, we outline a modified Mask R‐CNN technique that reliably and efficiently detects relict charcoal hearth (RCH) sites on light detection and ranging (LiDAR) data‐based digital elevation models (DEMs). Using image augmentation and image preprocessing steps combined with the deep learning‐based adaptive gradient method with a dynamic bound on the learning rate (AdaBound) optimization technique, we could improve the model's accuracy and significantly reduce its training time. We use DEMs based on high‐resolution LiDAR data and the visualization for archaeological topography (VAT) technique that give images with a very strong contrast of the terrain and the outline of the sites of interest in the North German Lowland. Therefore, the model can identify RCH sites with an average recall of 83% and an average precision of 87%. Techniques such as the modified Mask R‐CNN method outlined here will help to greatly improve our knowledge about archaeological site densities in the realm of historical charcoal production and past human‐landscape interactions. This method provides an accurate, time‐efficient and bias‐free large‐scale site mapping option not only for the North German Lowland but potentially for other landscapes as well.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/arp.1806

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Mask R-CNN has demonstrated effectiveness in similar archaeological contexts, including detection of burial clusters in the Mongolian steppe, burials and charcoal hearth sites in Germany, and terraces in Samoa.

    “Mask R-CNN has demonstrated its effectiveness in similar archaeological contexts34, including the detection of burial clusters across the Mongolian steppe35, burials36 and charcoal hearth sites37 in Germany, as well as terraces in Samoa38.”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 59

  1. 10.1007/s11760-020-01636-0 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.catena.2020.104896 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.foreco.2019.117814 · DOI
  4. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137189 · DOI
  5. 10.1007/s41636-019-00171-1 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.jas.2019.104998 · DOI
  7. 10.5334/jcaa.49 · DOI
  8. 10.1002/arp.1730 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1016/j.daach.2020.e00152 · DOI
  10. 10.1080/0734578X.2018.1482186 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.jas.2012.07.009 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1016/j.quaint.2020.10.020 · DOI
  13. 10.3390/rs5126427 · DOI
  14. 10.1016/j.catena.2020.104991 · DOI
  15. 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2019.103095 · DOI
  16. Girshick R., 2015, Fast r‐cnn, Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition
  17. Girshick R., 2014, Rich feature hierarchies for accurate object detection and semantic segmentation, Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition
  18. 10.1007/s00334-020-00769-z · DOI
  19. Gong Z., 2020, Research on gpr image recognition based on deep learning, Matec Web of Conferences, 309
  20. 10.3390/rs10020225 · DOI
  21. He K. Gkioxari G. Dollár P. &GirshickR. B.(2017).Mask r‐cnn. arXiv:1703.06870v3. · DOI · Paper page
  22. Henderson P., 2016, Computer Vision – ACCV 2016. ACCV 2016, 198
  23. 10.1002/arp.374 · DOI
  24. 10.1002/gea.21799 · DOI
  25. Johnson J. W.(2018).Adapting mask r‐cnn for automated nucleus segmentation. ArXiv abs/1805.00500. · arXiv
  26. Johnson K., 2015, Geospatial and LiDAR‐based analysis of 18th to early 20th century timber harvesting and charcoal production in southern New England, Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs At: Bretton Woods, 47, 65
  27. 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2924960 · DOI
  28. 10.1007/978-3-030-29891-3_43 · DOI
  29. 10.5194/isprs-annals-V-2-2020-493-2020 · DOI
  30. 10.3390/rs11070747 · DOI
  31. 10.3390/rs11070794 · DOI
  32. Lin T.‐Y. Maire M. Belongie S. Hays J. Perona P. Ramanan D. Dollár P. &Zitnick C. L.(2014).Microsoft coco: Common objects in context.Lecture Notes in Computer Science 8693 740–755.https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐319‐10602‐1_48 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Long J., 2015, Fully convolutional networks for semantic segmentation, Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition
  34. Luo L., 2019, Adaptive gradient methods with dynamic bound of learning rate, Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Representations
  35. 10.5334/jcaa.11 · DOI
  36. 10.1109/34.56205 · DOI
  37. 10.1109/IGARSS.2018.8517683 · DOI
  38. 10.1016/j.quaint.2017.07.022 · DOI
  39. 10.1016/j.quaint.2014.09.041 · DOI
  40. 10.1016/j.jas.2013.07.002 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.1016/j.quaint.2019.04.015 · DOI
  42. Schmidt M., 2016, Charcoal kiln sites, associated landscape attributes and historic forest conditions: DTM‐based investigations in Hesse (Germany), Forest Ecosystems, 3
  43. 10.1002/gea.21782 · DOI
  44. 10.1016/j.geoderma.2020.114241 · DOI
  45. Schneider A. Takla M. Nicolay A. Raab A. &Raab T.(2014).A template‐matching approach combining morphometric variables for automated mapping of charcoal kiln sites.Archaeological Prospection 22(1) 45–62.https://doi.org/10.1002/arp.1497 · DOI
  46. Simonyan K. &Zisserman A.(2014).Very deep convolutional networks for large‐scale image recognition.https://arxiv.org/abs/1409.1556v6
  47. 10.1016/j.quaint.2016.11.031 · DOI
  48. 10.1109/23.589532 · DOI
  49. Sorokin A.(2018).Lesion analysis and diagnosis with mask‐rcnn. arXiv: 1807.05979v2 · arXiv
  50. 10.1177/0309133318825284 · DOI
  51. 10.1007/s10113-020-01638-1 · DOI
  52. 10.1002/arp.1731 · DOI
  53. 10.1016/j.jag.2020.102241 · DOI
  54. 10.5334/jcaa.32 · DOI
  55. 10.3390/ijgi9050293 · DOI · Paper page
  56. Witharana C. Ouimet W. B. &Johnson K. M.(2018 GIScience & Remote Sensing).Using LiDAR and GEOBIA for automated extraction of 18th‐late 19th century relict charcoal hearths in southern New England.55(2) 183–204.https://doi.org/10.1080/15481603.2018.1431356 · DOI
  57. 10.1016/j.compag.2019.06.001 · DOI
  58. Zagoruyko S., 2016, A multipath network for object detection, Proceedings of the British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC), 15.1
  59. 10.3390/rs3020398 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Bonhage, A., Eltaher, M., Raab, T., Breuß, M., Raab, A., & Schneider, A.
Venue
Archaeological Prospection
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-02-02
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
177-186
ISSN
  • 1075-2196
  • 1099-0763
Cited by
67
References
3
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review