CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 58

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Interpreting cultural remains in airborne laser scanning generated digital terrain models: effects of size and shape on detection success rates

Risbøl, Ole, Bollandsås, Ole Martin, Nesbakken, Anneli, Ørka, Hans Ole, Næsset, Erik, Gobakken, Terje·2013·Journal of Archaeological Science
DOI 10.1016/j.jas.2013.07.002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jas.2013.07.002

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. Axelsson, 2000, DEM generation from laser scanner data using adaptive TIN models, International Archives of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 33, 111
  2. Bennett, 2012, A comparison of visualization techniques for models created from airborne laser scanned data, Archaeological Prospection, 19, 41, 10.1002/arp.1414 · DOI
  3. Bollandsås, 2012, Using airborne small-footprint laser scanner data for detection of cultural remains in forests: an experimental study of the effects of pulse density and DTM smoothing, Journal of Archaeological Science, 39, 2733, 10.1016/j.jas.2012.04.026 · DOI
  4. Challis, 2011, A generic toolkit for the visualization of archaeological features on airborne LiDAR elevation data, Archaeological Prospection, 18, 279, 10.1002/arp.421 · DOI
  5. Chase, 2011, Airborne LiDAR, archaeology and the ancient Maya landscape at Caracol, Belize, Journal of Archaeological Science, 38, 387, 10.1016/j.jas.2010.09.018 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Crow, 2007, Woodland vegetation and its implications for archaeological survey using LiDAR, Forestry, 80, 241, 10.1093/forestry/cpm018 · DOI
  7. Devereux, 2005, The potential of airborne lidar for detection of archaeological features under woodland canopies, Antiquity, 79, 648, 10.1017/S0003598X00114589 · DOI
  8. Devereux, 2008, Visualisation of LiDAR terrain models for archaeological feature detection, Antiquity, 82, 470, 10.1017/S0003598X00096952 · DOI
  9. Doneus, 2006, Full-waveform airborne laser scanning as a tool for archaeological reconnaissance, vol. 1568, 99
  10. Gallagher, 2008, Using LiDAR to detect cultural resources in a forested environment: an example from Isle Royale National Park, Michigan, USA, Archaeological Prospection, 15, 187, 10.1002/arp.333 · DOI
  11. Hesse, 2010, LiDAR-derived Local Relief Models – a new tool for archaeological prospection, Archaeological Prospection, 17, 67, 10.1002/arp.374 · DOI
  12. Kokalj, 2011, Application of the sky-view factor for the visualization of historic landscape features in lidar derived relief models, Antiquity, 85, 263, 10.1017/S0003598X00067594 · DOI
  13. Ladefoged, 2011, Agricultural potential and actualized development in Hawai'i: an airborne LiDAR survey of the leeward Kohala field system (Hawai'I Island), Journal of Archaeological Science, 38, 3605, 10.1016/j.jas.2011.08.031 · DOI
  14. Magnussen, 2010, Reliability of LiDAR derived predictors of forest inventory attributes: a case study with Norway spruce, Remote Sensing of Environment, 114, 700, 10.1016/j.rse.2009.11.007 · DOI
  15. Millard, 2009, Detection of a low-relief 18th-century British siege trench using LiDAR vegetation penetration capabilities at Fort Beauséjour-Fort Cumberland national historic site, Canada, Geoarchaeology: An International Journal, 24, 576, 10.1002/gea.20281 · DOI
  16. Nelder, 1972, Generalized linear models, Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 135, 370, 10.2307/2344614 · DOI
  17. Risbøl, 2006, Airborne laser scanning of cultural remains in forests: some preliminary results from a Norwegian project, vol. 1568, 107
  18. Stabbetorp, 2007, Layers of the past: a theory and method for historical landscape analysis, Landscape Research, 32, 463, 10.1080/01426390701449844 · DOI
  19. Štular, 2012, Visualization of lidar-derived relief models for detection of archaeological features, Journal of Archaeological Science, 39, 3354, 10.1016/j.jas.2012.05.029 · DOI
  20. Weishampel, 2011, Detection and morphologic analysis of potential below-canopy cave openings in the karst landscape around the Maya polity of Caracol using airborne LiDAR, Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, 73, 187, 10.4311/2010EX0179R1 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 58

Metadata

Authors
Risbøl, O., Bollandsås, O. M., Nesbakken, A., Ørka, H. O., Næsset, E., & Gobakken, T.
Venue
Journal of Archaeological Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-12
Volume
40
Issue
12
Pages
4688-4700
ISSN
0305-4403
DOI
10.1016/j.jas.2013.07.002
Cited by
58
References
0
Language
en
Licence
Funders
  • The Norwegian Forest
  • Landscape Institute

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