Integrating Archaeological Theory and Predictive Modeling: a Live Report from the Scene

It may state two separate claims as one.

Standard methods for survey data filtering do not exist, even though the statistical basis for it is well developed and can be relatively easily applied to predictive modeling.

“However, standard methods for survey data”

• cites Verhagen 2007b sourceCould not verify

  The available passage (section and page not specified) says the thesis covers survey bias in data used for predictive modelling. It does not say whether standard survey-data filtering methods exist or whether their statistical basis is well developed and easily applied. Searches for those terms and for survey-bias correction found no passage addressing either point. (LLM, conf=0.72)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites Finke et al. 2008 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites van Leusen et al. 2009 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

The model can easily be tested with statistical methods because the archaeological data set is not used for building the model.

“The model can easily be tested with statistical methods as the archaeological data set is not used for building the model.AfterKamermans and Wansleeben (1999)”

• cites Kamermans and Wansleeben 1999 sourcePartly supported

  The Introduction says the deductive model is built from a priori knowledge and known sites are then used to evaluate it, supporting the separation between construction and testing. The Additional information section also calls for testing against independent information. Neither passage says that statistical testing is easy because the archaeological dataset was not used to build the model; the Results instead describes practical difficulties with a commonly used statistical test. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

It may state two separate claims as one.

Merely splitting the composite caloric returns surface equally into three categories (low, moderate, and high) produced a Kvamme's gain statistic in excess of 0.80, whereas the best correlative or intuitive models did not produce better gains than 0.57.

“Merely splitting the composite caloric returns surface equally into three categories (low, moderate, and high) produced a Kvamme's gain statistic 3 (Kvamme 1988) in excess of 0.80, whereas the best correlative or intuitive models did not produce better gains than 0.57 (Fig. 7).”

• cites Kvamme 1988Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Climatic conditions similar to today and a stable (modern) sea level since 4500 BP.
• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Maintenance and collection costs decrease over time (between 4500 and 300 BP), while hunting success and harvest rates, as well as storage potentials, increase with certain specific technological changes.
• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Energy conservation is a primary motivating factor for certain human spatial behaviors.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

In this case, 308 sites fall within the study area.

“In this case, 308 sites fall within the study area.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

The advancement of theory implies that all interpretations are not inherently equally valid.

“In this context, the advancement of theory implies that all interpretations are not inherently equally valid and that, just as we evaluate some sites as more important (to us as archaeologists) than others, the same applies to archaeological explanations and interpretations.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The theoretical underpinning of predictive models is equally challenging whether we are dealing with mechanistic and/or biologic processes or with human decision-making.

“So, despite the wide variety of disciplines that apply predictive modeling for many kinds of analysis (of which we have not attempted to provide a comprehensive overview), it seems that the theoretical underpinning of predictive models is equally challenging whether we are dealing with mechanistic and/or biologic processes or with human decision-making.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Assessing uncertainty and indeterminacy is an essential aspect of dealing with questions of prediction.

“Apart from that, assessing uncertainty and indeterminacy is an essential aspect of dealing with questions of prediction.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.

We embrace the post-processual emphasis on pluralism because archaeology as a science can move forward only by looking at problems from different angles.

“We embrace the post-processual emphasis on pluralism, as the only way in which archaeology as a science can move forward is by looking at problems from different angles (see also Wylie 2002, pp. 171-178).”

• cites Wylie 2002 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

The heated debate between processual and post-processual schools now seems outdated, and not many archaeologists nowadays would profess to be adherents of the hard-core variants of either paradigm, but the effects of this debate are still felt.

“Even though the heated debate between the two schools now seems to have become somewhat outdated (see, e.g., Hegmon 2003;Johnson 2006) and not many archaeologists nowadays would profess to be adherents of the”

• cites Hegmon 2003 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Johnson 2006 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The post-processual school developed in the early 1980s in response to the New Archaeology and has dominated much of the archaeological theoretical discourse over the past 25 years, especially in the UK.

“The post-processual school, initially developed in the early 1980s in response to the seemingly anti-humanistic, ecosystemic, and deductive-nomological philosophy promoted by the New Archaeology, has dominated much of the archaeological theoretical discourse over the past 25 years, especially in the UK.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Radical post-processualism takes the other extreme and to a large extent denies the possibility and value of generalization and prediction.

“As explained earlier, radical post-processualism takes the other extreme and to a large extent denies the possibility (and therefore the value) of generalization and prediction.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The agenda of early radical post-processualism was an outright rejection of empiricist and scientistic views, not promotion of multiple interpretations including objectivist views.

“The not-so-hidden agenda of early, radical post-processualism was therefore not to promote multiple interpretations in which”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The general methodology of predictive modeling was developed long before the first affordable GIS software became available in the mid 1980s.

“Interestingly, the general methodology of predictive modeling was developed long before the first affordable GIS software became available in the mid 1980s.”

• cites Plog and Hill 1971Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Green 1973 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

This aspect of post-processual thinking is taken aboard by many archaeologists nowadays, even though not all would see it as their principal research goal.

“This aspect of post-processual thinking is taken aboard by many archaeologists nowadays, even though not all would see it as their principal research goal.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

Cognitive archaeology was not embraced by many and seems to have faded into oblivion.

“However, it was not embraced by many and seems to have faded into oblivion.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Complexity theory has failed to make a breakthrough into mainstream archaeology up to now, partly because of technical difficulties and partly because of the simplicity of the rules employed.

“It is however not usually seen in a post-processual light (but see Hegmon 2003) and has failed to make a breakthrough into mainstream archaeology up to now not only partly because of the technical difficulties involved but also because of the simplicity of the rules employed.”

• cites Hegmon 2003 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Post-processual theory considers the role of individuals (agents) to be the driving force of all archaeological patterning.

“Instead, the role of individuals (”

It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.

While predictive models based on such theories may seem to produce reasonable results from a CRM perspective, there is no mechanism available to test the theoretical assumptions of the model.

“And while predictive models based on such theories may then seem to produce reasonable results from a CRM perspective (like predicting 70% of the archaeological site sample”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The dichotomy between inductive and deductive modeling arose in the late 1970s as a historical development and not necessarily as two methodological schools of thought.

“We want to stress however that the dichotomy between the”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Post-processualism emphasizes the importance of individual experience.

“Furthermore, postprocessualism emphasizes the importance of individual experience.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Complexity theory incorporates two important characteristics of post-processual thought in a quantitative, dynamical modeling framework by including agents in creating spatial patterns and allowing multiple model outcomes.

“In fact, it incorporates two important characteristics of post-processual thought in a quantitative, dynamical modeling framework by explicitly including the role of agents in creating (spatial) patterns and by allowing for multiple model outcomes and thus multiple interpretations.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

What makes archaeological predictive modeling perhaps even more demanding is the fact that it is a discipline in which both lines of inquiry can play a role.

“What makes archaeological predictive modeling perhaps even more demanding is the fact that it is a discipline in which both lines of inquiry can play a role.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

Scientific methods are essential to evaluating archaeological explanations and interpretations.

“Scientific methods are essential to this.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

Theory, when considered at all, is either assumed to be existing and only needing extrapolation or reduced to specifying simplistic ecological cause-effect relationships that can be fit to available environmental data sets.

“Theory, when it is considered at all, is either assumed to be existing and only needing extrapolation or it is reduced to specifying rather simplistic (ecological) cause-effect relationships that can be fit to the available environmental data sets.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

These approaches are much more controversial and do not seem directly relevant to predictive modeling, although they do suggest that archaeologists are beginning to understand the need to recreate past cognitive processes.

“These approaches are much more controversial and do not seem directly relevant to predictive modeling, although they do suggest that archaeologists are beginning to understand the need to recreate past cognitive processes.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Predictive modeling is from a scientific point of view a perfectly laudable and worthwhile enterprise that can be used to extend theories of spatial patterning into testable generalizations, but in practice it stumbles when dealing with developing and testing site location theories in archaeology.

“So, while predictive modeling is from a scientific point of view a perfectly laudable and worthwhile enterprise that can be used to extend theories of spatial patterning into testable generalizations, in practice it stumbles when dealing with developing and testing site location theories in archaeology.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

In many instances, the data used for predictive modeling were never collected with the explicit aim of constructing a predictive model, creating biases that are undesired from a statistical point of view.

“In many instances, the data used for predictive modeling were never collected with the explicit aim of constructing a predictive model from it, creating all kinds of bias that are undesired from a statistical ( testing) point of view.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The exploratory (theory building) and testing phases in the scientific research process are the most problematic for predictive modeling.

“It will be clear that the exploratory (theory building) and testing phases in this scheme are the most problematic for predictive modeling.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Binford's criteria for good middle range theory are not unproblematic.

“These criteria are however not unproblematic, and we will try to illustrate this in the next section.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Most attempts to combine processual and post-processual thought in modeling cannot be considered very successful.

“Most attempts to combine processual and post-processual thought in modeling however cannot be considered very successful.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.

Middle range theory is the critical bridge between general theory and empirical data, in which both inductive and deductive perspectives can be effective.

“Middle range theory is then the critical bridge between general theory and empirical data, in which both inductive and deductive perspectives can be effective.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

A predictive model which recommends a less intensive survey strategy for some areas is merely classifying some sites as being of lesser importance than others.

“A predictive model which recommends a less intensive survey strategy for some areas is then merely classifying some sites as being of lesser importance than others”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

This assumption is made without regard to whether prehistoric farmers had the ability to measure and track slight differences in soil fertility across the landscape and place settlements accordingly.

“This assumption is made without regard to whether the prehistoric farmers had the ability to measure and track slight differences in soil fertility across the landscape and place settlements accordingly.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Especially North American prehistoric archaeologists are still reluctant to see agency as a useful concept for their research.

“Especially North American prehistoric archaeologists are still reluctant to see agency as a useful concept for their research.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Archaeology takes an intermediate position between disciplines that predict on the basis of mechanistic/biological processes and those dealing with human decision-making, as it combines elements of both.

“Archaeology in that sense takes an intermediate position as it combines elements of both.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Most archaeological theory building can be characterized by generalizations in two forms: general laws and statistical laws.

“Tschauner (1996) states that most archaeological theory building can be characterized by generalizations in two forms:”

• cites Tschauner 1996 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

The absence of causality in such statements would draw considerable criticism from philosophers of science.

“The absence of causality in such statements would draw considerable criticism from philosophers of science (e.g., Salmon 1971Salmon , 1998)).”

• cites Salmon 1971 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Salmon 1998 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

By the 1980s, two primary lines of research were being called predictive models: theoretical ecosystemic models without substantial quantitative evaluation, and correlative statistical models extrapolating environmental variables.

“By the 1980s, two primary lines of research were being called predictive models: first, a largely theoretical series of models based on the use of ecosystemic structures and relationships to identify spatial suitability (e.g., Jochim 1976Jochim , 1981;;Bettinger 1980) but which had no substantial quantitative evaluation of a spatial area (in the same sense as we would expect in a GIS) and, second,”

• cites Jochim 1976Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Bettinger 1980 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Kvamme 1983Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The entire notion of a site presupposes that there are parts of the landscape that are less important for research or preservation.

“The entire notion of a”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

GIS is routinely applied as a tool for science in archaeology, but almost always used in straightforward data mapping overlay or low-level analysis.

“GIS is routinely applied as a tool for”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Academic appreciation of archaeological predictive modeling has been mixed because of its perceived theoretical poverty.

“Its appreciation in academic circles however has been mixed because of its perceived theoretical poverty.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Theory building that should go on between the phases of data exploration and extrapolation is currently often neglected.

“Furthermore, the theory building that should go on between the phases of data exploration and extrapolation is currently often neglected.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

From a modeling perspective, middle range theory is an obvious candidate for theory that can lead to better predictions without becoming too complex.

“From a modeling perspective, middle range theory is an obvious candidate.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

This has led some archaeologists to fully embrace phenomenology and try to engage the mindset of prehistoric people by simulating an immersion in their environment.

“This has led some archaeologists to fully embrace phenomenology and try to engage the mindset of prehistoric people by simulating an immersion in their environment, by installing doorframes in the landscape, for example, in order to understand what it would be like to look at the landscape from inside a dwelling (see, e.g., Tilley et al. 2000).”

• cites Tilley et al. 2000 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.

The assumption that prehistoric farmers would have preferred fertile land for agriculture is hardly contentious, but when asked where this land might have been, how much would have been necessary, and where settlements might have been located, theory readily gives way to the basic practical notion that certain soil types are more productive and therefore supported more settlements.

“For example, the assumption that prehistoric farmers would have preferred fertile land for agriculture is hardly contentious.However, when asked where this land might have been, how much of it would have been necessary to support the population, and where settlements might have been located with regard to the accessibility of this land or any other resources, theory readily gives way to the basic”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Prehistoric farmers would have preferred fertile land for agriculture.
• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Certain soil types are more productive than others and therefore supported more settlements.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Classification schemes used for soil maps are intended for modern agricultural land suitability valuation purposes.

“Furthermore, the classification schemes used for soil maps are intended for modern agricultural land suitability valuation purposes.”

Probably not a substantial claim.

We consider pluralism in the refutationist tradition of setting up multiple models and theories that can be tested and compared to reveal weaknesses and advance theory.

“We consider pluralism in the refutationist tradition of setting up multiple models and theories that can be tested and compared in order to reveal weaknesses and thus contribute to the advancement of theory (Bell 1994).”

• cites Bell 1994Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

The modern view of land suitability may bear some relation to the (pre-)historic perception of land quality, but this is by no means a straightforward relationship.

“While the modern view of land suitability may bear some relation to the (pre-)historic perception of land quality, this is by no means a straightforward relationship (see, e.g., Favory and van der Leeuw 1998, pp. 278-284).”

• cites Favory and van der Leeuw 1998 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

The accuracy and amount of detail of environmental variables can vary greatly; digital elevation models are especially notorious, and errors in original elevation maps will have repercussions on the accuracy of derived data like slope maps, cost surfaces, and viewsheds.

“First of all, the accuracy and amount of detail of these can vary greatly; digital elevation models are especially notorious in this respect, and any errors in the original elevation maps will also have repercussions on the accuracy of derived data like slope maps, cost surfaces, and viewsheds (see, e.g., Nackaerts et al. 1999).”

• cites Nackaerts et al. 1999 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It may state two separate claims as one.

The main problem with hard-core postprocessualism with regard to modeling is its rejection of scientific methods and its mistaken assumption that using these will automatically lead to scientism or positivism.

“From the foregoing, we conclude that the main problem with (hard-core) postprocessualism with regard to modeling is found in its rejection of scientific methods, in the mistaken assumption that using these will automatically lead to”

It may state two separate claims as one.

It is inaccurate to assume that GIS has been the main factor influencing the initial development of predictive modeling, although it helped its further proliferation in the 1990s.

“It is therefore inaccurate to assume that GIS has been the main factor influencing the initial development of predictive modeling, although it certainly helped its further proliferation in the 1990s.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

If we focused on understanding how people inhabit and use their environment from a cognitive perspective, then the site becomes merely an area where a certain kind of behavior led to the accumulation of debris or features, not the entirety of research potential.

“If we focused on understanding how people inhabit and use their environment from a cognitive perspective and not by where they accumulate their detritus, then the”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

In areas predicted to be of low archaeological potential, predictive models are used to recommend a less intensive survey strategy, and sites may be overlooked and lost forever.

“Especially in areas that are predicted to be of”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.

Other disciplines do not fare much better than archaeology; the theoretical underpinning of predictive models is equally challenging whether dealing with mechanistic and/or biologic processes or with human decision-making.

“In fact, other disciplines do not fare much better, although some of these might seem to be better equipped with tested and testable theories.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Post-processual theory usually strongly downplays the determining influence on human behavior of both the natural environment and cultural systems of social organization.

“Firstly, post-processual theory usually strongly downplays the determining influence on human behavior of both the natural environment and cultural”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The tension between specifying law-like assumptions with universal applicability and predicting phenomena in considerable detail is evident, and when applied in this way it is virtually impossible to connect fundamental theory to actual data.

“The tension between these goals is evident, and when applied in this way it is virtually impossible to connect fundamental theory to actual data.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

In the final probability assessment, it is this very decision which is being modeled.

“In the final probability assessment, it is this very decision which is being modeled.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Modeling is a way of opening up a theory to testing.

“and, as we stated earlier, modeling is a way of opening up a theory to testing.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Very little work has been done on identifying and correcting survey biases, even though the importance of source criticism is acknowledged in many regional archaeological studies.

“Surprisingly enough, there is very little work done on these issues even though the importance of”

• cites Mischka 2008Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

Even in the late 1990s, setting up and calculating a suite of scenarios in a GIS could take weeks or months, which would make it highly impractical to pursue a multitude of models.

“Even in the late 1990s, setting up and calculating a suite of scenarios in a GIS could take weeks or months, which would make it highly impractical to pursue a multitude of models.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

Many manifestations of material culture are evidence of group rather than individual actions, but the methodology for dealing with the agency of social collectives is underdeveloped.

“Many manifestations of material culture are evidence of group rather than individual actions, but the methodology for dealing with the agency of social collectives seems to be underdeveloped.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.

The modeling itself is no longer the problem but developing and translating the necessary theory still is.

“The modeling itself is no longer the problembut developing and translating the necessary theory still is.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Binford's notion of uniformitarian assumptions is satisfied if we consider his meaning to have been that the explanations presented in this model do not require the adoption of general rules of human behavior that do not apply in other areas under other conditions.

“3. Binford's notion of uniformitarian assumptions is satisfied if we consider his meaning to have been that the explanations presented in this model do not require the adoption of general rules of human behavior that do not apply in other areas under other conditions.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The urnfield theory clearly provides plausible causes (population increase and associated social change) for demonstrable effects (introduction of celtic field agriculture and change in mortuary practice coupled to territorial division of land).

“& The theory clearly provides plausible causes (population increase and associated social change) for demonstrable effects (the introduction of celtic field agriculture and a change in mortuary practice coupled to territorial division of the land).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

In all other cases, confirming observations do not prove the veracity of a model; they only support its probability.

“In all other cases, confirming observations do not prove the veracity of a model; they only support its probability.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The process of decision-making presented is distinctly cause and effect, not correlative.

“2. The process of decision-making presented is distinctly cause and effect, not correlative.”

Probably not a substantial claim.

Probabilistic sampling is a necessary precondition for collecting data sets to be used for testing, as it is the only way to obtain statistically reliable predictions and avoid observational bias.

“Not surprisingly, it was concluded that probabilistic sampling is a necessary precondition for collecting data sets to be used for testing as this is the only way to obtain statistically reliable predictions and thus avoid the problem of observational bias.”

• cites Rose and Altschul 1988Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Kvamme 1988Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Kvamme 1990Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Once conditions are classified, a decision is made regarding whether to carry out some behavior.

“Once conditions are classified, a decision is made regarding whether to carry out some behavior.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Similarly, the cost-distance radius at which it is more efficient to process the collected resource rather than bring it back whole (i.e., processing radius) would also be a function of its weight and its processing time or difficulty.

“Similarly, the cost-distance radius at which it is more efficient to process the collected resource rather than bring it back whole (i.e., processing radius) would also be a function of its weight and its processing time or difficulty.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Decision-making is thought to be the result of conscious or unconscious weighing of the perceived costs and benefits of a particular action, given certain initial conditions.

“Decision-making is thought to be the result of conscious or unconscious weighing of the perceived costs and benefits of a particular action, given certain initial conditions.”

• cites Whitley 2005Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The actual interplay of causes and effects in the urnfield theory remains somewhat vague.

“The actual interplay of causes and effects however remains somewhat vague.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Given that some species return only a modest number of calories, while others much more so, the cost-distance (i.e., foraging radius) at which it is no longer efficient to collect them would vary depending on their probable caloric return, ability to be gathered in quantity, dietary attractiveness, potential for other uses, and the current caloric or nutritional stress of the foragers.

“For example, given that some species return only a modest number of calories, while others much more so, the cost-distance (i.e., foraging radius) at which it is no longer efficient to collect them would vary depending on their probable caloric return, ability to be gathered in quantity, dietary attractiveness, potential for other uses, and the current caloric or nutritional stress of the foragers”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

This becomes easier and more predictable for commonly recurring behaviors, and full evaluation of all possible costs and benefits probably only occurs for uncommon or unfamiliar behaviors.

“Clearly, this becomes easier and more predictable for commonly recurring behaviors, and full evaluation of all the possible costs and benefits probably only occurs for uncommon or unfamiliar behaviors.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

After perception, each initial condition is classified (either consciously or subconsciously) with regard to its beneficial or adverse effects on site selection, i.e., a cost-benefits analysis.

“After perception, each initial condition is classified (either consciously or subconsciously) with regard to its beneficial or adverse effects on site selection, i.e., a cost-benefits analysis.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.

Most sciences will have tremendous difficulties in producing model results that are true under all circumstances, and successful examples are restricted to things like the prediction of celestial mechanics.

“It is not hard to see that most sciences will have tremendous difficulties in producing these kinds of model results, and successful examples are restricted to things like the prediction of celestial mechanics, for example.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The urnfield theory is unambiguous.

“& First of all, the theory is unambiguous.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The foraging radii can provide estimates of carrying capacity, relative monthly bounties by forage categories, intensity of resource competition, and surplus and exchange.

“The foraging radii (including both proximity-and perception-related falloff rates) can provide estimates of carrying capacity, relative monthly bounties by forage categories, intensity of resource competition, and surplus and exchange”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Energy conservation is a primary motivating factor for certain human spatial behaviors.

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

Testability (or refutability) is the hallmark of any good scientific theory.

“Testability (or refutability) is the hallmark of any good scientific theory (Bell 1994), and, as we stated earlier, modeling is a way of opening up a theory to testing.”

• cites Bell 1994Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Extensification might be an equally well-suited strategy to cope with increasing demand for food.

“Furthermore, extensification (taking more land into production while maintaining the same farming methods) might be an equally well-suited strategy to cope with an increasing demand for food.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Because these models are ultimately representations of the spatial distribution of potential energy sources, it may be possible to develop a wide range of interpretive surfaces that consider more complex economic issues.

“Because these models are ultimately representations of the spatial distribution of potential energy sources, it may be possible to develop a wide range of interpretive surfaces that consider more complex economic issues (a few examples are illustrated in Fig. 10).”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Energy conservation is a primary motivating factor for certain human spatial behaviors.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Decision-making is dependent on the acquisition of information.

“Decision-making is dependent on the acquisition of information.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Correlative modelers are not assuming that there is no human agency or decision-making in site selection.

“Obviously, correlative modelers are not assuming that there is no human agency or decision-making in site selection.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Several important cultural changes are observed at the transition of Middle to Late Bronze Age in the southern Netherlands, including new urnfield mortuary ritual, new decorated ceramics, more bronze objects, and celtic field agriculture.

“Several important cultural changes are observed at the transition of Middle to Late Bronze Age in the area, and these are summarized as follows (Roymans and Kortlang 1999, p. 36):”

• cites Roymans and Kortlang 1999Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

We are convinced that there are practical ways to better embed archaeological theory in predictive modeling.

“We are however convinced that there are practical ways to better embed archaeological theory in predictive modeling.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Many behaviors were probably encoded into the neural pathways of past people such that cognitive processes of site selection were carried out as a matter of subconscious immediacy, based on having learned to heuristically assess a spatial environment for key indicators rather than to fully evaluate their surroundings every time.

“Many behaviors were probably encoded into the neural pathways of past people in such a way that the cognitive processes of site selection were carried out as a matter of subconscious immediacy, based on having learned to heuristically assess a spatial environment for key indicators rather than to fully evaluate their surroundings every time.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Predictive models are predominantly used in CRM for designating zones where survey is enforced, which means that supposedly high probability areas will be surveyed more often than low probability zones.

“This is partly due to the fact that the predictive models themselves are predominantly used in CRM for designating zones where survey is enforced (see, e.g., van Leusen 2009), which means that supposedly high probability areas will be surveyed more often than low probability zones.”

• cites van Leusen 2009 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The uniformitarian condition will be problematic for any attempt to explain social change in prehistory because there are no present-day correlates available as benchmarks.

“& The uniformitarian condition will be problematic for any attempt to explain social change in prehistory as there are no present-day correlates available that could be used as benchmarks.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.

There is a real danger in unwittingly using archaeological survey data sets for predictive model testing, so the most important task is to identify potential biases and try to correct for them.

“So, there is a real danger in unwittingly using archaeological survey data sets for predictive model testing, and the most important task is therefore to identify potential biases and try to correct for them.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

Not everything can be so easily budgeted and evaluated for costs and benefits in terms of caloric returns.

“However, not everything can be so easily budgeted and evaluated for costs and benefits in terms of caloric returns.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The specific surfaces illustrating the available caloric returns and the associated spatial decisions are guided by the environmental conditions, the species present, the acquisition and storage technologies available, and furthermore in the nature of trade, tribute, and the speculation on future returns that may have been part of social contracts.

“The specific surfaces illustrating the available caloric returns and the associated spatial decisions are guided by the environmental conditions, the species present, the acquisition (e.g., hunting, gathering, agriculture) and storage technologies available, and furthermore in the nature of trade, tribute, and the speculation on future returns that may have been part of social contracts.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Energy conservation is a primary motivating factor for certain human spatial behaviors.

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The almost impenetrable jungle of archaeological theoretical writing has not helped towards a better integration of quantitative modeling in archaeological research.

“On the other hand, the almost impenetrable jungle of archaeological theoretical writing has not helped us very much towards a better integration of quantitative modeling in archaeological research.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Theoretical notions are often defined in such an abstract way that it may be hard to figure out whether we are dealing with, for example, middle range theory at all.

“Theoretical notions are often defined in such an abstract way that it may be quite hard to figure out whether we are dealing with, for example, middle range theory at all.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

For economic reasons, most surveys tend to favor the detection of relatively large and conspicuous archaeological sites, and this practice is often codified in national or state survey guidelines.

“For economic reasons, most surveys will therefore tend to favor the detection of relatively large and conspicuous archaeological sites, and this practice is in many cases even codified in national or state survey guidelines.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

These contexts are specific configurations of social and environmental variables that not so much determine the issues about which people reason but at least narrow these down to a range of what is likely.

“These contexts are specific configurations of social and environmental variables that not so much determine the issues about which people reason but at least narrow these down to a range of what is likely.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

In correlative models, between the assessment of initial conditions and the selection of location is an assumption that some cognitive process took place which led to the behavior which caused the deposition of the site.

“In between the assessment of the initial conditions and the selection of the location for a (typically unspecified) behavior is an assumption that some cognitive process took place which led to the behavior which caused the deposition of the site.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Our modern cognitive process of perceiving these material byproducts (through survey and excavation) and classifying them into meaningful clusters (i.e., sites) completes the causal chain from the initial conditions to our typical units of study.

“Our modern cognitive process of perceiving these material byproducts (through survey and excavation) and classifying them into meaningful clusters (i.e., sites) completes the causal chain from the initial conditions to our typical units of study.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Some highly significant spatial behaviors result in the deposition of no artifacts or features whatsoever.

“In fact, some highly significant spatial behaviors result in the deposition of no artifacts or features whatsoever.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

All the direct and indirect acquisition and processing of information represent the cognitive process of perception (or acquiring knowledge).

“All the direct and indirect acquisition and processing of information represent the cognitive process of perception (or acquiring knowledge).”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The reductionist statistical analysis used in correlative models precludes any attempt to understand what cognitive steps are actually present in the process.

“Yet, the nature of the reductionist statistical analysis used in such models precludes any attempt to understand what cognitive steps are actually present in the process.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The model can be considered independent from general theory because it is independent from our assumptions about Native American subsistence practices on the Georgia Coast and their knowledge of the landscape.

“4. The model can be considered independent from general theory (in the sense of Bogaard 2004) because it is independent from our assumptions about Native American subsistence practices on the Georgia Coast and their knowledge of the landscape.”

• cites Bogaard 2004 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The majority of agent-based modeling studies use simulated individual agents with rules for social behavior, and patterns emerge from the interactions of individuals over time.

“This is also demonstrated by the majority of agent-based modeling studies where simulated individual agents are provided with rules for social behavior, and patterns will emerge from the interactions of individuals over time.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Whether the evaluation is conscious or subconscious, the structure of the process is still the same.

“Whether the evaluation is conscious or subconscious though, the structure of the process is still the same.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Correlative (inductive) models assume that the current distribution of archaeological sites is a direct reflection of once observable spatial characteristics that were consciously and/or subconsciously selected as locations for human behavior.

“Correlative (inductive) models assume that the current distribution of archaeological sites is a direct reflection of once observable spatial characteristics that were consciously and/or subconsciously selected as locations for human behavior.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The celtic fields themselves are not evidence of further intensification, especially since no technological innovations are suggested that might have allowed for higher agricultural production.

“This would seem to indicate that the celtic fields themselves are not evidence of further intensification, especially since no technological innovations are suggested that might have allowed for higher agricultural production.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The condition of probabilistic sampling could not be met under most circumstances because of biases in archaeological survey procedures, so a statistically valid prediction of site densities would in most cases be illusory.

“However, various authors concluded that this condition could not be met under most circumstances (Brandt et al. 1992;Dalla Bona 1994;Deeben et al. 1997) because of biases in archaeological survey procedures and therefore a statistically”

• cites Brandt et al. 1992 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Dalla Bona 1994Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Deeben et al. 1997Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

It is likely that many behavioral decisions were made on the basis of partial or incomplete information.

“In actuality, it is likely that many behavioral decisions were made on the basis of partial or incomplete information.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

The analysis of these variables allows a projection of the expected number of calories per 30 m map unit of prime habitat, as well as their monthly resilience.

“The analysis of these variables allows a projection of the expected number of calories per 30 m map unit of prime habitat (i.e., HM value of 1), as well as their monthly resilience (a function of the estimated population density, their rate of survival assuming a stable population, the length of time it takes for an individual to reach reproductive maturity, and their mean number of offspring).”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

In many cases, calories are expended in exchange for ephemeral or often unmeasureable benefits.

“In many cases, calories are expended in exchange for ephemeral or often unmeasureable benefits.”

Probably not a substantial claim.

Agency theory does not preclude dealing with groups as agents.

“Agency theory in itself does not preclude dealing with groups as agents, but we will have to decide on the scale level first before trying to include agency into our models.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

Absence of a site in a correlative model implies the absence of behavior or the presence of behavior of no importance to archaeologists.

“Absence of a site in a correlative model implies the absence of behavior or the presence of behavior of no importance to archaeologists.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

It will, in many cases, be difficult to specify what the currency at the other end of the equation is, let alone the conversion rate.

“It will however, in many cases, be difficult to specify what the currency at the other end of the equation is, let alone the conversion rate.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

Other sciences seem less concerned with theoretical justification of quantitative model building and may be considered too naïve in their approaches to predictive modeling.

“As discussed earlier, other sciences seem to be somewhat less concerned with the theoretical justification of quantitative model building and in that sense may be considered too naïve in their approaches to predictive modeling.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The criteria for refuting a predictive model are unspecified, and using statistical significance levels is only partly helpful.

“Obviously, a model may be rejected after realizing that the available data contradict its outcome, but the actual criteria on when to refute a model are unspecified and using statistical significance levels is only partly helpful in this.”

Probably not a substantial claim.

Correlative models make the assumption that we are concerned only with the physical products of the archaeological record itself.

“This makes the assumption that we are concerned only with the physical products of the archaeological record itself.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Most, if not all, issues pertaining to the geographical distribution of archaeological remains can be approached by applying a combination of the principles of cognitive archaeology and the analysis of post-depositional processes.

“We contend that most, if not all, issues pertaining to the geographical distribution of archaeological remains can be approached by applying a combination of the principles of cognitive archaeology and the analysis of post-depositional processes.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

We would expect that sites resulting from the loss or discard of artifacts associated with daily activities would occur along these pathways, and a predictive model could be generated to capture them.

“We would expect that sites resulting from the loss or discard of artifacts associated with daily activities would occur along these pathways, and a predictive model could be generated to capture them.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Energy conservation is a primary motivating factor for certain human spatial behaviors.

It may state two separate claims as one.

The cognitive modeling framework has already been successfully applied to a variety of case studies, including American slave societies (Whitley 2003), an Egyptian necropolis (Burns et al. 2008), and long term hunter-gatherer subsistence dynamics in the drowning Mesolithic landscape in the Dutch province of Flevoland (Peeters 2007).

“The cognitive modeling framework has already been successfully applied to a variety of case studies, including American slave societies (Whitley 2003), an Egyptian necropolis (Burns et al. 2008), and long term hunter-gatherer subsistence dynamics in the drowning Mesolithic landscape in the Dutch province of Flevoland (Peeters 2007), and as far as we can judge it delivers predictions more cost-eff”

• cites Whitley 2003Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Burns et al. 2008Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Peeters 2007Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

In correlative models, no attempt is made to understand the relationship between behavior and the deposition of artifacts or features; it is assumed that there is a direct and consistent correlation.

“In addition, no attempt is made to understand the relationship between behavior and the deposition of artifacts or features; it is assumed that there is a direct and consistent correlation.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

For most species, an effective one-way-daily foraging radius of 450 kcal consumed (or around 5 km) is likely.

“In general, he finds that for most species an effective one-way-daily foraging radius of 450 kcal consumed (or around 5 km in his estimation) is likely (Thomas 2008, Fig. 11.12).”

• cites Thomas 2008Not checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Increased computing power has now made it possible to run hundreds or thousands of models in a relatively short time.

“While we still do not have software that is particularly geared towards these kinds of exercises, increased computing power has now made it possible to run hundreds or thousands of models in a relatively short time.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The decisions made reflecting their use or storage are tempered by the costs and benefits involved.

“The decisions made reflecting their use or storage are tempered by the costs and benefits involved.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

While we can probably specify the energy input needed to go to a particular place and perform the burials and associated rituals, there is no quantifiable output involved.

“While we can probably specify the energy input needed to go to a particular place and perform the burials and associated rituals, there is no quantifiable output involved.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

All predictive models are expressions of a probabilistic relationship between human behavior and prior existing spatial conditions.

“All predictive models have one thing in common: they are expressions of a probabilistic relationship between human behavior and prior existing spatial conditions.”

Probably not a substantial claim.

Repeated consistency between model output and measured response is then taken as proof that the model is validated or even verified.

“Repeated consistency between model output and measured response is then taken as proof that the model is validated or even verified.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Archaeologists appear to actively employ popular terms such as agency without specifying or perhaps even understanding their definitions.

“Archaeologists appear to actively employ popular terms such as”

Probably not a substantial claim.

In correlative models, cognition is implied but is of no direct consequence for identifying correlations.

“Cognition is implied but is of no direct consequence for identifying correlations.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Certain kinds of behavioral event are more likely to produce the intentional discard of artifacts, the unintentional loss of them, and/or the intentional or unintentional creation of features.

“Certain kinds of behavioral event are more likely to produce the intentional discard of artifacts, the unintentional loss of them, and/or the intentional or unintentional creation of features.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.

The approach sketched is not at all limited to ecological or economic systems and is a long way removed from the inductive and intuitive procedures prevalent in predictive modeling.

“However, we hope to have made clear that the approach sketched is not at all limited to ecological or economic systems and is a long way removed from the inductive and intuitive procedures prevalent in predictive modeling.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.

Possible benefits of burials could be of a practical, social, and ritual nature, and all of these have no clear quantifiable or even spatial characteristics, leaving us with considerable problems when trying to predict the most probable location for a burial site.

“Possible benefits could be of a practical (deposing of the deceased's body), social (strengthening community bonds), and ritual nature (providing a place of access to the world of the ancestors), and all of these have no clear quantifiable or even spatial characteristics, leaving us with considerable problems when trying to predict the most probable location for a burial site.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

By empirically showing correlations between sites and modern proxies for past initial conditions, there is presumed to be no need for understanding the in-between step of cognition at all.

“By empirically showing the correlations between sites (or non-site localities) and the modern proxies for past initial conditions, there is presumed to be no need for understanding the in-between step of cognition at all.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The framework of the GIS model is not dependent upon the initial values chosen and inserting better or alternate data is always possible when it becomes available.

“It should be noted that the framework of this GIS model is not dependent upon the initial values chosen and inserting better or alternate data is always possible when it becomes available.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

In predictive modeling, we are trying to model a rather specific, testable implication of archaeological theory: the influence of human behavior on the accumulation of the material record at the regional scale.

“We have to keep in mind that, in predictive modeling, we are trying to model a rather specific, testable implication of archaeological theory, i.e., the influence of human”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Examples of cognitive archaeology and complexity theory have not met with general acceptance among archaeologists.

“As mentioned earlier, examples of this way of thinking such as cognitive archaeology and complexity theory have not met with general acceptance among archaeologists.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Cognitive predictive modeling is flexible enough to accommodate the prediction of all kinds of human activity leading to a variety of material imprints in the archaeological record.

“Cognitive predictive modeling is flexible enough to accommodate the prediction of all kinds of human activity leading to a variety of material imprints in the archaeological record.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Moving back and forth between scales is a fundamental aspect of archaeological research.

“Moving back and forth between scales is a fundamental aspect of archaeological research as all of our generalizations are made on the basis of individual observations that we try to connect into a coherent interpretative and theoretical framework.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The spatial extent of predictive models is often limited to administrative boundaries, which introduces edge effects when using variables based on distance calculations.

“Similarly, the spatial extent of predictive models is often limited to administrative boundaries, which has the added disadvantage of introducing edge effects when using variables based on distance calculations.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Dynamical models can give a good idea of the kinds of pattern that will emerge from certain behaviors but not of the exact location or chronological order in which they will appear.

“In most cases, dynamical models will be able to give a good idea of the kinds of pattern that will emerge from certain behaviors but not of the exact location or the chronological order in which they will appear.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Traditional correlative modeling and deductive models are not well suited for predicting anomalies because of the highly specific characteristics of these sites.

“Traditional correlative modeling is no good for this, and even deductive models do not seem to be very well suited for it because of the highly specific characteristics of these sites.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The modifiable area unit problem is a well-known phenomenon in geography: patterns can be made to emerge and disappear by changing the size and positions of the observational units.

“The modifiable area unit problem for example is a well-known phenomenon in geography: patterns can be made to emerge and disappear by changing the size and positions of the observational units.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Occurrences that are not very common can be predicted even on the basis of a single observation, although the error rate of the prediction will be impossible to establish in such a case.

“However, we want to amend to this that occurrences that are not very common can be predicted even on the basis of a single observation-although the error rate of the prediction will be impossible to establish in such a case.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Archaeology has sometimes been accused of being obsessed with the unique.

“Archaeology has sometimes been accused of being obsessed with the unique (Pollard 2004).”

• cites Pollard 2004Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

Predictive modeling can evolve into a heuristic tool for developing and testing archaeological theory, not just an equation that gives an estimate of site densities for a particular region.

“Predictive modeling in this way evolves into a heuristic tool for developing and testing archaeological theory, not just an equation that will give us an estimate of site densities for a particular region.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

It is a recurrent criticism of predictive modeling that the models produced will fail to predict unique occurrences.

“It is one of the most recurrent criticisms of predictive modeling that the models produced will fail to predict unique occurrences-the implication being that these are more interesting and valuable than general occurrences.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Geographers have long recognized the problem of ecological fallacy, i.e., the danger of erroneous extrapolation from one scale level to another.

“Furthermore, geographers have long recognized the problem of what is known as ecological fallacy, i.e., the danger of erroneous extrapolation from one scale level to another (see, e.g., Harris 2006).”

• cites Harris 2006 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The methodology suggested in this paper can be helpful in breaking through the self-reinforcing mechanism of site-based archaeological research in CRM that leads to doing more of the same all of the time.

“We also think that the methodology suggested in this paper can be helpful in breaking through the self-reinforcing mechanism of site-based archaeological research in CRM that leads to doing more of the same all of the time.”

Probably not a substantial claim.

The observational scale used may not be the scale at which processes operate and patterns emerge.

“However, it is not always appreciated that the observational scale used may not be the scale at which processes operate and patterns emerge.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The chain of cause and effect can be carried further to include evaluating archaeological sites for heritage management significance, reactions with preservation or management behavior, and results on understanding cultural landscapes and the archaeological record.

“Of course, the chain of cause and effect can be carried further to include our evaluating of archaeological sites for their significance to heritage management, our reactions with different kinds of preservation or management behavior, and the results of our efforts on understanding specific cultural landscapes and the archaeological record in general.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Our predictive model may be accurate in identifying areas similar to those where depositions have been found, but it is not very precise in delineating potential deposition locations because we lack clear ideas about what made people select specific places and sufficient data to correlate these places to other landscape elements.

“Our predictive model may then be accurate in identifying areas (river beds and adjacent flood plains) that are similar to those where depositions have been found in the past, but it is not very precise in delineating potential deposition locations as we do not have very clear ideas about what made people select specific places within flood plains for weapon deposition nor do we have sufficient”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The emphasis on the individual is evident in current interest in phenomenology and agency.

“The emphasis on the individual is also evident in current interest in phenomenology and agency even though these approaches deal less directly with the material record.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

Inductive methods can be useful for filling in the gaps when theory is underdeveloped.

“Inductive methods can also be useful for filling in the gaps when theory is un(der)developed.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

Explanatory models like the Georgia Coast Model not only increase the power of the predictions made but can also be used to explore all kinds of questions on the spatial behavior of people in the past.

“Explanatory models like the Georgia Coast Model not only increase the power of the predictions made but can also be used to explore all kinds of questions on the spatial behavior of people in the past.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Some activities, like hunting big game, can only be performed in groups.

“Even more, some of these activities, like hunting big game, can only be performed in groups.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Any dynamical model aiming for reliable prediction would have to be based on real initial conditions and have benchmark data available of intermediate and end conditions to limit outcomes to realistic scenarios.

“Any dynamical model that would aim for (reliable) prediction would therefore have to be based on”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

In most cases, we will have very little to choose from because of the limitations of the available data sets.

“In most cases, we will have very little to choose from because of the limitations of the available data sets.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

One of the reasons why working with digital elevation models and derived variables like slope and aspect became so popular in North American predictive modeling was the availability of cheap or even free elevation models from the US government.

“One of the reasons why working with digital elevation models and derived variables like slope and aspect became so popular in North American predictive modeling was the availability of cheap or even free elevation models from the US government.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Late Bronze Age weapon depositions in fluvial contexts in the Netherlands are typical examples of highly specific sites considered extremely valuable for better understanding ritual practices.

“For example, Late Bronze Age weapon depositions in fluvial contexts in the Netherlands are typical examples of highly specific sites that are considered extremely valuable for better understanding ritual practices (Roymans and Kortlang 1999;Fontijn 2003).”

• cites Roymans and Kortlang 1999Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Fontijn 2003Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

The translation of archaeological theory into a predictive model is not always easy and will in most cases need a thorough analysis and reinterpretation of available theoretical perspectives into practical, middle range theoretical models.

“However, we also hope to have made clear that the translation of archaeological theory into a predictive model is not always easy and will in most cases need a thorough analysis and reinterpretation of the available theoretical perspectives on the spatial patterning of archaeological remains into practical, middle range theoretical models.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

It is only after Roman colonization that widespread quarrying appears in many mountainous regions of Europe, made possible by technological innovations in mining and road building and triggered by a new socio-economic demand for building in stone.

“For example, it is only after Roman colonization that we see widespread quarrying in many mountainous regions of Europe, made possible by technological innovations in mining and road building and triggered by a new, socio-economic demand for building in stone.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

These weapons were not deposited in graves until later in the Iron Age.

“For some reasons, these weapons were not deposited in graves until later in the Iron Age.”

The quote only partly states this claim.

Consequently, we will end up with predictive models with a large amount of false positives, i.e., with a low gain.

“Consequently, we will then end up with predictive models with a large amount of”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Barrett's definition of agency is an example of a tendency to mystify aspects of archaeological theory in terms that are almost as incomprehensible to the uninitiated as mathematical equations.

“The clarification of the subject is not helped by definitions like 'Agency is always situated in the resources of space/time, a being-in-the-world whose actions carry the past into the future and which make reference to absent places in the locations of its own operations'(Barrett 2000).It is just one example of a tendency to mystify aspects of archaeological theory in terms that are almost as”

• cites Barrett 2000Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The finds of weaponry, especially swords, in rivers suggest the existence of a warrior elite that may have controlled access to exchange networks with other groups.

“The finds of weaponry (especially swords) in rivers suggest the existence of a warrior elite that may have controlled access to exchange networks with other groups.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

The study will cover nearly 43,000,000 acres of the district, and the goal is to provide a quantitative measure for the probability of encountering classes of sites and behaviors defined by regulatory agencies, not to simplify results into a high-low dichotomous model.

“Although the study will cover the nearly 43,000,000 acres of the district, the goal is not to simplify the results into a highlow dichotomous model but to provide a quantitative measure for the probability of encountering the classes of sites and behaviors that the regulatory agencies (i.e., the USACE and the Mississippi, Louisiana, and Arkansas State Historic Preservation Offices) have helped to”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The power of predictive models to predict the unusual ultimately depends on the data sets used, the spatial extent and resolution chosen, and the theoretical framework applied.

“The power of predictive models to predict the unusual ultimately depends on the data sets used, the spatial extent and resolution chosen, and the theoretical framework applied.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

Cognitive modeling in the example is unambiguous; the theory presented is straightforward and based on solid principles of energy capture and conservation.

“Figure: 1. Cognitive modeling in this example is unambiguous.The theory presented is straightforward and based on solid principles of energy capture and conserva-”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Much of what we rubricate under problems of scale constitutes an artifact of the way in which we collect and classify our data.

“Much of what we rubricate under problems of scale constitute an artifact of the way in which we collect and classify our data.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The SWARM initiative is not coupled to GIS and needs serious programming skills to be used effectively.

“The SWARM initiative (www.swarm.org),while better maintained, is not coupled to GIS and needs serious programming skills to be used to effect.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

Inductive, correlative methods still have an important role as tools for exploratory data analysis in the phase leading up to theory building.

“We still see an important role however for inductive, correlative methods as tools for exploratory data analysis in the phase leading up to theory building-after all, theories do not fall out of thin air; they are always based on particular observations.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Shanks and Tilley (1987) questioned the assumption that the formulation of universal or covering laws is a superior kind of scientific activity.

“Note however that Shanks and Tilley (1987, p. 38) questioned the reverse assumption, promoted by New Archaeologists, that the formulation of universal or covering laws is a superior kind of scientific activity.”

• cites Shanks and Tilley 1987Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The deductive cognitive modeling framework is extremely flexible, easier to operate and understand, better suited for testing purposes, and produces better predictions than currently prevailing alternatives, although controlled field tests of predictive models are still very rare.

“The (deductive) cognitive modeling framework is extremely flexible, easier to operate and understand, better suited for testing purposes, and as far as we can tell produces better predictions than the currently prevailing alternatives-although we have to be a bit wary about the last statement as controlled field tests of predictive models are still very rare.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

These weapons are never found outside fluvial contexts.

“They are never found outside fluvial contexts, and given the scarcity of these remains it is assumed that these locations may have had regional or even supra-regional significance as places where competition between local groups could be”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Many users of predictive maps in urban and rural planning are not interested in complex and subtle mapping but need clear guidelines on what to do with the archaeological problem.

“After all, many of the users of predictive maps working in urban and rural planning are not really interested in ever more complex and subtle mapping but need clear guidelines on what to do with the archaeological”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.

This entails working in partnership with agencies and individuals that may have different goals and finding ways to bridge the gap between interpretation and useful application.

“It also entails working in a partnership with agencies and individuals that may have different goals in mind and finding ways in which to bridge the gap between interpretation and useful application.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Technical difficulties for dynamical modeling are still substantial because no off-the-shelf GIS offers dynamical modeling capabilities, and available open source products are not sophisticated enough for easy application.

“For the moment however the technical difficulties involved are still substantial since no off-the-shelf GIS offers dynamical modeling capabilities, and the available open source products have not yet reached a sufficient state of sophistication for easy application.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

All cartographic data suffer from generalization and classification schemes.

“This is not typical only of archaeology: all cartographic data suffer from this as they are the end product of generalization and classification schemes.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

In cases where we insufficiently understand the reasons for a particular behavior to define cause-and-effect relationships, statistical methods can at least give us an idea of the bandwidths involved.

“In cases where we insufficiently understand the reasons for a particular behavior to define cause-and-effect relationships, statistical methods can at least give us an idea of the bandwidths involved.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The MAGICAL software developed by Lake was developed for use with GRASS version 4 and has not been upgraded since.

“The MAGICAL software developed by Lake for example was developed for use with GRASS version 4 and has not been upgraded since.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Other fundamental questions concerning the specificity of predictions are coupled to geographical and temporal scale or resolution.

“Other fundamental questions concerning the specificity of predictions are coupled to geographical and temporal scale or resolution.”

Probably not a substantial claim.

This includes developing a series of interpretive surfaces based on paleoeconomic modeling and aimed at specific temporal periods, site types, and behaviors.

“This includes developing a series of interpretive surfaces based on paleoeconomic modeling and aimed at specific temporal periods, site types, and behaviors.”