The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 13 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Geographical Information Systems in Archaeology
Open accessAbstract
Geographical Information Systems has moved from the domain of the computer specialist into the wider archaeological community, providing it with an exciting new research method. This clearly written but rigorous book provides a comprehensive guide to that use. Topics covered include: the theoretical context and the basics of GIS; data acquisition including database design; interpolation of elevation models; exploratory data analysis including spatial queries; statistical spatial analysis; map algebra; spatial operations including the calculation of slope and aspect, filtering and erosion modeling; methods for analysing regions; visibility analysis; network analysis including hydrological modeling; the production of high quality output for paper and electronic publication; and the use and production of metadata. Offering an extensive range of archaeological examples, it is an invaluable source of practical information for all archaeologists, whether engaged in cultural resource management or academic research. This is essential reading for both the novice and the advanced user.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This is the introductory chapter of a manual on GIS in archaeology, arguing that GIS is one powerful tool among many and that its appropriate use requires awareness of the theoretical concepts of space embedded in it. It reviews the philosophical debate over space and the parallel debate over whether GIS is a "tool" or a "science," then traces how archaeological GIS has moved from common-sense narrative through scientific explanation toward post-processual concerns.
Key findings
- Two philosophical concepts of space are argued to map onto GIS data models: the absolute ("container") concept fits the continuous field model and raster DEMs, while the relative concept has "some affinity" with the entity model and vector maps — though the authors caution that raster and vector are data structures, not data models, and either can represent the other.
- Spatial languages (geometries) differ in specificity: topology cannot measure distance or area and suits relative space and stratigraphic relations (e.g. the Harris matrix), whereas Euclidean geometry is metric and supports more meaningful questions, such as measuring areas covered by deposits.
- The chapter traces archaeological GIS through three modes: "common-sense" narrative (e.g. Gaffney and Stančič 1991, 1992, who showed Roman towers on Hvar are intervisible but did not test whether this arose by chance), scientific explanation (Kvamme 1993; van Leusen 1993; Wheatley 1995, 1996 using a one-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test; Fisher et al. 1997 on control samples and causality), and post-processual critique.
- Three strands of post-processual thought are reviewed: how we learn about the past (phenomenology; the charge that GIS perpetuates Haraway's "God trick"), what we study (meaning and symbolism versus environmental determinism), and the "otherness" of the past (Thomas 2004 questioning how far a microprocessor can facilitate experiential archaeology).
Methods
- This is a theoretical and introductory review chapter, not an empirical study; it presents no dataset, sample, or statistical analysis of its own.
- It synthesises philosophical literature on space (Harvey, Popper, Kant, Newton), GIS data-model literature (Burrough and McDonnell 1998; Couclelis 1992; Worboys 1995), and a body of archaeological GIS case studies to frame the book's practical chapters.
- The chapter also outlines the book's structure, mapping chapters to tasks such as data acquisition (Chapters 4–5), surface generation (Chapter 6), analysis (Chapters 7–11), presentation (Chapter 12), and metadata maintenance (Chapter 13).
Limitations
- Stated: the authors concede that the three strands of post-processual thought they use to organise the discussion "are not so readily separable" in reality, and that they cannot provide instructions for every GIS software package, offering only some package-specific examples.
- Stated: they note that the earliest research-orientated archaeological GIS studies are treated only briefly and that a fuller treatment of visibility studies appears elsewhere (Lake and Woodman 2003).
- Evident from the text: as an introductory chapter it advances no testable claims or original data, so its arguments rest on selective citation of prior work rather than systematic review; the "tool versus science" debate is summarised rather than resolved.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
11 No basis given · 10 Own interpretation · 9 Sources not found
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The tendency of processual archaeology to focus most attention on the ecological and economic dimensions of human existence has been replaced by an emphasis on meaning and symbolism.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hodder 1990
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Thomas 1991b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From then on there was a clear concern with increasing inferential rigour.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, a programme of field survey by surface collection is more likely to be predicated on the absolute concept of space and to emphasise relationships that require Euclidean geometry.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Curiously, the earliest research-orientated archaeological GIS studies generally mirrored the 'common-sense' approach of 'traditional' archaeology (Aldenderfer 1996)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Aldenderfer 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the authors did not attempt to support it by, for example, demonstrating that intervisibility is unlikely to have occurred by chance alone and was not a byproduct of some other favourable attribute.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Since the mid 1990s European archaeological GIS practitioners have been particularly concerned that the use of GIS has, whether intentionally (Wheatley 1993, p. 133) or otherwise (Gaffney et al. 1996, p. 132), encouraged the continuation or even re-introduction of a positivist approach that had otherwise been rejected by post-processual archaeology.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wheatley 1993
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Gaffney et al. 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This, however, risks replacing a determinism based on one suite of environmental variables with a determinism based on another.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The most problematic is that modern GIS packages offer users a variety of powerful tools that are easily applied, without providing much guidance on their appropriateness for the data or questions at hand.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 9
- Probably not a substantial claim. 21
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For instance, the single context recording system used on many deeply stratified urban excavations is essentially predicated on the relative concept of space and emphasises topological relations.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“there has been much debate in geography about whether GIS constitutes a 'tool' or a 'science' (Wright et al. 1997)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wright et al. 1997
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As will become clear in Chapter 2, the location descriptor is what sets GIS apart from other database systems.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“metadata are of vital importance, as the investment in creating a GIS will soon be wasted without them.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
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.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In our view it does, both for the use of GIS to record archaeological evidence and for its subsequent use to analyse that evidence in the hope of learning about the past.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
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.
In the paper
“His work was subsequently further refined by Fisher et al. (1997), who emphasised that the mere existence of an association between human activity and one or more environmental variables does not in itself provide adequate evidence of a causal relationship.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fisher et al. 1997
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, one of the most notable features of topological geometries is that they do not allow one to measure distance or area.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The two principal data models used in GIS to describe how these should be linked to some extent mirror the two philosophical concepts of space.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This approach represents a significant break with positivist models of inference, eschewing expert explanation based on the results of statistical tests in favour of multiple understandings, each potentially unique to a particular participant.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The requirements of the two different archaeological problems just outlined will best be met using different models of space: the entity model in the first case and the relative model in the second, which in turn suggests the creation of vector and raster maps, respectively”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Any kind of spatial analysis, whether formal or informal, is ultimately predicated on a concept of space.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
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 paper
“Geographical information systems require two descriptors to describe the real world: attribute records what is present while location records where it is (Worboys 1995).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Worboys 1995
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since the continuous field model organises information by a set of predetermined locations in space it can be considered to fit quite closely with the philosophical absolute concept of space.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Western thought has been dominated by two main philosophical ideas about the nature of space, one of which views it as a container and the other as a relation between things.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Harvey 1969
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, the second critique initially appears less tractable, as it questions the very use of computer methods.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
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 states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Topology distinguishes spatial objects that should be considered different on account of the way in which they relate to their neighbours and, for that reason, it has a close affinity with the relative model of space.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“However, artificial intelligence researchers, including many specialists in sociological simulation, are actively moving beyond traditional computational theory of mind and tackling issues such as the social construction of emotions (Cañamero and de Velde 2000) and the idea that cognition is not somehow separate from engagement with the world (Maris and te Boekhorst 1996).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cañamero and de Velde 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Maris and te Boekhorst 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“At the root of his doubt is the well-known critique of computational theory of mind (Dreyfus 1972; Searle 1992), which argues that traditional artificial intelligence and computational methods simply do not capture the real nature of thinking and knowledge.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Dreyfus 1972
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Searle 1992
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“much archaeological research conducted since the 1970s has been conducted in processual vein, that is, broadly predicated on the assumption that the methods of the natural sciences can be used to explain the subject matter of the social sciences.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Euclidean geometry has long been associated with the absolute concept of space.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The entity model has some affinity to the philosophical relative concept of space, at least to the extent that it organises information by entity rather than by a set of predetermined locations in space.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Archaeological users of GIS have made suggestions that may go some way to addressing the first of these critiques.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
GIS has matured to the point where non-specialists can use relatively user-friendly software to solve real archaeological problems.
“The study of geographical information systems (GIS) has now matured to the point where non-specialists can take advantage of relatively user-friendly software to help them solve real archaeological problems.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The application of methods like creating an elevation model from widely spaced contour lines is likely to produce highly unsatisfactory results and interpretative errors.
“none that we know of would warn that the application of this method to widely spaced contours is likely to produce highly unsatisfactory results that could lead to a host of interpretative errors further down the line.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Researchers who become overdependent on the data management abilities of GIS may shy away from tackling more analytical questions.
“there is a risk that researchers who become overdependent on the data management abilities of GIS may shy away from tackling more analytical questions simply because it is not immediately obvious which buttons to push.”
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?
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“By calculating and storing conductivity from each raster cell to all other adjacent raster cells based on a usersupplied function, both isotropic (conductivity neither benefited nor hindered by direction) and anisotropic costs (conductivity is direction-dependent) can be incorporated into the LCP analysis (Conolly & Lake, 2006, pp. 217-221;Wheatley & Gillings, 2002, pp. 137-140).”
From Probabilistic modelling for incorporating uncertainty in least cost path results: a postdictive roman road case study (2021) · cites this paper as Conolly & Lake, 2006
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“To avoid corner-connected cells with high costs surrounded by cells of low friction [Conolly and Lake 2006: 216], buffers for linear features like the water courses were computed before converting them to raster format [Herzog 2013b].”
From Issues in replication and stability of least-cost path calculations (2022) · cites this paper as Conolly and Lake 2006: 216
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Recording the evidence
“In contrast, a programme of field survey by surface collection is more likely to be predicated on the absolute concept of space”
§ Recording the evidence
“The requirements of the two different archaeological problems just outlined will best be met using different models of space: the entity model in the first case and the relative model in the second”
Citations
Cites
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 401–500 of 764
Du croquis de fouille au Web Sig. Le Système d’information géographique d’Amathonte (Chypre)
Cannavò, A., & Fadin, L. (2016) · Les Nouvelles de l archéologie · doi:10.4000/nda.3802 · Cited by 4
Mining, Ritual, and Social Memory: An Exploration of Toponymy in the Ica Valley, Peru
Gijseghem, H. V., & Whalen, V. H. (2017) · University Press of Colorado eBooks · doi:10.5876/9781607325963.c012 · Cited by 4
Castillejo, A. M., Romero, F. G., Landa, C., & García, C. B. (2017) · Journal of Archaeological Science Reports · doi:10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.09.010 · Cited by 4
Análisis distribucional de las estatuillas incaicas encontradas en el volcán Llullaillaco
Mignone, P. (2017) · Bulletin de l’Institut français d’études andines · doi:10.4000/bifea.8145 · Cited by 4
Lilley, K. D. (2017) · Landscapes · doi:10.1080/14662035.2018.1429717 · Cited by 4
A conduit between two worlds: Geography and connectivity in the Euboean Gulf
Knodell, A. R. (2017) · NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives · Cited by 4
Akhter, H., & Promei, N.-E.-A. (2018) · Archaeological Discovery · doi:10.4236/ad.2018.64017 · Cited by 4
Assandri, S., & Gastaldi, M. R. (2018) · Mundo de Antes · doi:10.59516/mda.v12.83 · Cited by 4
Megarry, W. P., Markham, M., Gilhooly, B., O’Neill, B., & Cooney, G. (2021) · The Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology · doi:10.1080/15564894.2021.1880506 · Cited by 4
Abd, E. (2011) · Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research · Cited by 4
Spatial Information Technologies and Landscape Archaeology: Past Problems and Future Directions
Kvamme, K. L. (2012) · Refubium (Universitätsbibliothek der Freien Universität Berlin) · doi:10.17169/refubium-22365 · Cited by 4
Statistical means for identifying hunter–gatherer residential features in a lithic landscape
Morgan, C. T., Cannon, M. B., & Fowler, B. L. (2013) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2013.04.009 · Cited by 4
Aboriginal Alpine Ceremonialism in the White Mountains, California
Morgan, C. T., Bettinger, R. L., & Giambastiani, M. (2014) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 4
Alt, K. W., Held, P., & Nicklisch, N. (2013) · Rechtsmedizin · doi:10.1007/s00194-013-0875-8 · Cited by 4
Riris, P. (2017) · Journal of Archaeological Science Reports · doi:10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.01.002 · Cited by 4
Rituals of the Past: Final Comments
Moore, J. D. (2017) · University Press of Colorado eBooks · doi:10.5876/9781607325963.c013 · Cited by 4
10 Conflict and Culture Change on the Plains
Hollinger, R. E. (2018) · University Press of Colorado eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctvgd21w.12 · Cited by 4
Drass, R. R., Perkins, S. M., & Vehik, S. C. (2018) · University Press of Colorado eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctvgd21w.10 · Cited by 4
Lundström, V., & Riede, F. (2019) · Journal of Archaeological Science Reports · doi:10.1016/j.jasrep.2019.101886 · Cited by 4
Alternative Trajectories in Bronze Age Landscapes and the ‘Failure’ to Enclose:
Kienlin, T. L., Korczyñska, M., & Cappenberg, K. (2014) · Archaeopress Publishing Ltd eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctvqmp120.13 · Cited by 4
Verbrugghe, G., Saey, T., & Clercq, W. D. (2020) · Archaeological Prospection · doi:10.1002/arp.1768 · Cited by 4
Verbal Expressions of Geographical Information
Eide, Ø. (2015) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199664139.003.0013 · Cited by 4
Archaeological Information Systems
Kulitz, I., & Ferschin, P. (2012) · Contributions in mathematical and computational sciences · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-28021-4_16 · Cited by 4
The usage of unmanned aerial vehicles and their prospects in Archaeology
Nilsson, D. K. (2013) · Lund University Publications Student Papers (Lund University) · Cited by 4
Bilotti, G., & Campeggi, M. (2021) · Journal of Archaeological Science Reports · doi:10.1016/j.jasrep.2021.103077 · Cited by 3
Raking over the Ashes—The Analysis of the LBA Ashmounds from NE Romania
Brașoveanu, C., Asăndulesei, A., Brunchi, R.-A., & Tencariu, F. (2023) · Remote Sensing · doi:10.3390/rs15071826 · Cited by 3
Defauconpret, A., Gravier, J., Charbonnier, J., Gourret, G., de Lisle, A. L., Sepeau, S., & Kanhoush, Y. (2024) · Journal of Field Archaeology · doi:10.1080/00934690.2024.2391641 · Cited by 3
Communicating Archaeological Risk with Web-Based Virtual Reality: A Case Study
Landeschi, G., Lucca, I. I., & Carrozzino, M. A. (2011) · Internet Archaeology · doi:10.11141/ia..31.3 · Cited by 3
Water Conservancy System and Urban Layout of Yinxu, the Capital City of Shang: A GIS Approach
Wang, Y., Qin, Z., Hou, W., & Storozum, M. J. (2022) · Land · doi:10.3390/land11070986 · Cited by 3
Verma, A. K., & Devi, A. (2024) · ShodhKosh Journal of Visual and Performing Arts · doi:10.29121/shodhkosh.v5.i2.2024.2072 · Cited by 3
Brughmans, T., Isaksen, L., & Earl, G. P. (2012) · Amsterdam University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9789048516865.042 · Cited by 3
Teaching Spatial Literacy and Spatial Technologies in the Digital Humanities
Bodenhamer, D. J., & GREGORY, I. N. (2011) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119950592.ch16 · Cited by 3
López-Fraile, F. J., Alcaraz‐Castaño, M., López-Recio, M., Preysler, J. B., Morín, J., Roca, M., Rodríguez-Avello, L., Tapias, F., Pérez‐González, A., & Santonja, M. (2014) · Virtual Archaeology Review · doi:10.4995/var.2014.4206 · Cited by 3
Architecture and Ritual Practices at Huaca A of Pampa de las Llamas–Moxeke
Sara-Lafosse, R. V.-C. (2017) · University Press of Colorado eBooks · doi:10.5876/9781607325963.c005 · Cited by 3
El Turriforme escalonado de Son Ferrer. Un hito de referencia en el paisaje.
Galmés-Alba, A. (2017) · MATERIALIDADES PERSPECTIVAS ACTUALES EN CULTURA MATERIAL · doi:10.22307/2340.8480.2016.01.001 · Cited by 3
The Ceramics, Agricultural Resources and Food*
Vroom, J. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108557757.008 · Cited by 3
Compilations: Designing and Using Archaeological Databases
Banning, E. B. (2020) · Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archaeology/Interdisciplinary contributions to archaeology · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-47992-3_4 · Cited by 3
Heritage Trekking: Toward an Integrated Heritage Studies Methodology
Holley‐Kline, S., & Papazian, S. (2020) · Journal of Field Archaeology · doi:10.1080/00934690.2020.1807241 · Cited by 3
A comparison of rock art and bluff shelter spatial distributions in the eastern Arkansas Ozarks
Schaefer, J. L. (2022) · Southeastern Archaeology · doi:10.1080/0734578x.2021.2017636 · Cited by 3
What do spatial data from Sibhudu tell us about life in the Middle Stone Age?
Conard, N. J., Brenner, M. J., Bretzke, K., & Will, M. (2022) · Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences · doi:10.1007/s12520-022-01585-4 · Cited by 3
Efkleidou, K., Karantoni, M., Triantaphyllou, S., & Andreou, S. (2022) · JOURNAL OF GREEK ARCHAEOLOGY · doi:10.32028/jga.v7i.1712 · Cited by 3
Euboean towers and Aegean powers: insights into the Karystia’s role in the ancient world
Gardner, C. A. M., & Seifried, R. M. (2016) · JOURNAL OF GREEK ARCHAEOLOGY · doi:10.32028/jga.v1i.647 · Cited by 3
Galligani, P. E. (2023) · Revista del Museo de Antropología · doi:10.31048/1852.4826.v16.n1.38228 · Cited by 3
Maritime Least Cost Path Analysis: Archaic Travel Routes in the Upper Great Lakes
Peterson, R. E. (2022) · Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology · doi:10.5406/23274271.47.2.01 · Cited by 3
Garcés, R., Roca, M., Martínez-Clavel, B., & Morilla, A. M. B. (2023) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167296 · Cited by 3
Echenique, N. G., & Jäkel, A. (2024) · Virtual Archaeology Review · doi:10.4995/var.2024.19693 · Cited by 3
3D characterization of the Mila 18 archaeological site in Warsaw, Poland: From imaging to excavation
McClymont, A., Konik, J., Jol, H. M., Bauman, P. D., Miazga, C., & Reeder, P. P. (2024) · The Leading Edge · doi:10.1190/tle43100657.1 · Cited by 3
Borreggine, M., Slayton, E. R., Bartos, N., Farr, H., Kealy, S., & Zaia, S. (2025) · Journal of Maritime Archaeology · doi:10.1007/s11457-025-09454-6 · Cited by 3
Cegielski, W., & Lieb, B. R. (2011) · Native South/Native south · doi:10.1353/nso.2011.0007 · Cited by 3
The Waters at the End of the World
Murray, D. M. (2015) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199664139.003.0003 · Cited by 3
Hanson, I. (2016) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-40199-7_31 · Cited by 3
Brindle, T. (2009) · Theoretical Roman Archaeology Journal · doi:10.16995/trac2008_53_72 · Cited by 3
Mignone, P. (2015) · Virtual Archaeology Review · doi:10.4995/var.2013.4356 · Cited by 3
GIS landscape models for the study of preindustrial settlement patterns in Mediterranean areas
Brunet, J. M. V. G. T. C., García, J., Herrera, V. M., & González, A. U. (2008) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9780203881613-23 · Cited by 3
Taylor, S. (2017) · Lithics: The Journal of the Lithic Studies Society · Cited by 3
Minchilli, M., & Tedeschi, L. F. (2017) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-62404-4_51 · Cited by 3
Lanzelotti, S. L., & Buzai, G. D. (2017) · Mundo de Antes · doi:10.59516/mda.v11.54 · Cited by 3
Pallo, M. C., & Borrero, L. A. (2020) · Estudios Atacamenos · doi:10.22199/issn.0718-1043-2020-0014 · Cited by 3
IUENNA – openIng the soUthErn jauNtal as a micro-regioN for future Archaeology: A «para-description»
Hagmann, D., & Reiner, F. (2023) · Peer Community Journal · doi:10.24072/pcjournal.338 · Cited by 3
Pugin, J. M. (2016) · Cited by 3
Clark, J. T. (2007) · Universitätsbibliothek Tübingen · doi:10.15496/publikation-2900 · Cited by 3
Echenique, N. G. (2021) · doi:10.35537/10915/130296 · Cited by 3
Visualizing Pausanias’s Description of Greece with contemporary GIS
Foka, A., Demiroglu, O. C., Barker, E., Mostofian, N., Konstantinidou, K., Kiesling, B., Talatas, L., & Palm, K. (2021) · Digital Scholarship in the Humanities · doi:10.1093/llc/fqab093 · Cited by 2
Modeling Coast Salish landscape/seascape use and territory with GIS
Morin, J., Ritchie, M., Blake, M., & Hunt, A. (2025) · Frontiers in Environmental Archaeology · doi:10.3389/fearc.2025.1613245 · Cited by 2
Li, Z., Meng, Q., Lu, X., Fang, Z., Fen, W., Tang, Z., & Wu, H. (2025) · npj Heritage Science · doi:10.1038/s40494-025-02085-z · Cited by 2
Bridging space and theory: trends in Czech spatial archaeology in the 21st century
Tkáč, P., & Kolář, J. (2025) · Journal of Archaeological Science Reports · doi:10.1016/j.jasrep.2025.105524 · Cited by 2
Johnson, J. K. (2015) · D-Scholarship@Pitt (University of Pittsburgh) · Cited by 2
Modelling Settlement Rank-Size Fluctuations
Crema, E. R. (2014) · Advances in geographic information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-00008-4_8 · Cited by 2
Sycamore, R. A., & Buchanan, B. (2016) · Libyan Studies · doi:10.1017/lis.2016.5 · Cited by 2
The Potential of Airborne LiDAR for Detection of New Archaeological Site in Romania
Vizireanu, I., & Mateescu, R. (2017) · Coastal research library · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-57577-3_37 · Cited by 2
Gis Investigation Of Site Selection Of Historical Structures: The Case Of Knidos (Datça, Turkey)
Gümüş, M., DURDURAN, S. S., Bozdağ, A., & Gümüş, K. (2017) · Mediterranean Archaeology & Archaeometry. International Journal/Mediterranean archaeology and archaeometry. International scientific journal · doi:10.5281/zenodo.810818 · Cited by 2
Abramiuk, M. A. (2019) · Afghanistan · doi:10.3366/afg.2019.0024 · Cited by 2
Stewart, E. (2019) · Digital Scholarship in the Humanities · doi:10.1093/llc/fqz043 · Cited by 2
PENEMPATAN SITUS -SITUS NEOLITIK DI DAS CIBEUREUM , LEBAK , BANTEN
Laili, N. F. A. (2019) · PANALUNGTIK · doi:10.24164/pnk.v2i2.17 · Cited by 2
Vidalis-Kelagiannis, M., Kalogeropoulos, K., Grigorakakis, G., Stathopoulos, N., Petropoulos, G. P., Tsatsaris, A., & Chalkias, C. (2021) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-818617-6.00008-1 · Cited by 2
Rocky Mountain Archaeology: A Tribute to James Benedict
(2015) · Plains Anthropologist · doi:10.1179/2052546x15y.0000000010 · Cited by 2
Humans and Nature in Siberia: From the Palaeolithic to the Middle Ages
Kuzmin, Y. V., Bykov, N. I., & Krupochkin, E. P. (2022) · Springer geography · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-90061-8_3 · Cited by 2
Herzog, I. (2022) · it - Information Technology · doi:10.1515/itit-2022-0010 · Cited by 2
Marsal, R., & García-Carpallo, J. (2023) · Virtual Archaeology Review · doi:10.4995/var.2024.19977 · Cited by 2
Rubio‐Campillo, X. (2023) · Cuadernos de Prehistoria y Arqueología de la Universidad de Granada · doi:10.30827/cpag.v33i0.27415 · Cited by 2
The Ashwell Project: creating an online geospatial community
Lien-Talks, A. G. W. (2024) · Internet Archaeology · doi:10.11141/ia.67.12 · Cited by 2
The visual landscape of rock art in Qeydu Valley in Teymare in the Central Iranian Plateau
Karimi, E. (2024) · Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage · doi:10.1016/j.daach.2024.e00358 · Cited by 2
Piech, I., & Dacko, A. (2025) · Geomatics Landmanagement and Landscape · doi:10.15576/gll/201206 · Cited by 2
Reconstructing Early Colonial Andean Ritual Practice at Pukara, Peru: An Architectural Approach
Abraham, S. J. (2017) · University Press of Colorado eBooks · doi:10.5876/9781607325963.c010 · Cited by 2
Utilizing Historic Cartography in 3D for Archaeological Prospection on Alcatraz
Gavette, P., & Page-Schmit, K. (2018) · Digital Heritage International Congress · doi:10.1109/digitalheritage.2018.8810063 · Cited by 2
To See and to be Seen – the Antonine Wall in the Context of Spatial Analysis
Dyčka, M. (2016) · DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · Cited by 2
Trofaier, A. M., Trofaier, Rees, W. G., Maria, A., Gareth, W., & Aster, R. T. (2015) · Fennia · doi:10.11143/46290 · Cited by 2
Mignone, P. (2013) · DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.1311218 · Cited by 2
Reconstruct street network from imprecise excavation data using fuzzy Hough transforms
de Runz, C., Desjardin, É., Piantoni, F., & Herbin, M. (2013) · GeoInformatica · doi:10.1007/s10707-013-0183-1 · Cited by 2
Arıkan, B. (2011) · DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · Cited by 2
Distant readings of the geographies in text corpora:mapping Norman Nicholson’s poems and letters
Donaldson, C., Murrieta‐Flores, P., & GREGORY, I. N. (2016) · Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) · Cited by 2
Bassett, H. F. (2015) · Historical Archaeology · doi:10.1007/bf03377141 · Cited by 2
Landscapes and Land Use along Soda Playa in the Mojave Desert
Arend, T., & Roth, B. J. (2015) · California Archaeology · doi:10.1080/1947461x.2015.1108556 · Cited by 2
Mapping Spatial and Temporal Distance in Herodotus and Thucydides
Rood, T. (2015) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199664139.003.0006 · Cited by 2
From Herodotus to a ‘Hellenistic’ World? The Eastern Geographies of Aristotle and Theophrastus
Stevens, K. (2015) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199664139.003.0007 · Cited by 2
Chaco Landscapes: Data, Theory and Management
Dyke, R. V., Lekson, S. H., Heitman, C. C., & Thomas, J. (2016) · Lincoln (University of Nebraska) · Cited by 2
Rituals of the Past : Prehispanic and Colonial Case Studies in Andean Archaeology
Bautista, S. L., & Rosenfeld, S. (2017) · University Press of Colorado eBooks · doi:10.1353/book.51261 · Cited by 2
Pozzo, A. D., Immordino, F., & Candigliota, E. (2017) · 地球科学与工程：英文版 · doi:10.17265/2159-581x/2017.02.001 · Cited by 2
Archaeology in Distress: Federal Land Management and Archaeological Vulnerability
Washam, R. M. (2014) · OhioLink ETD Center (Ohio Library and Information Network) · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Conolly, J., & Lake, M.
- Affiliations
- Trent University (CA)
- University College London (GB)
- Venue
- Cambridge University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2006-05-04
- OpenAlex
- W297006095
- Cited by
- 761
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 35 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 61 · 2017: 74 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 56 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 35
- FWCI
- 14.59
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Andalas University Repository (Andalas University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeological Research and Protection
- Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Geographic Information Systems Studies
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Spatial and Panel Data Analysis
- Keywords
- geographic information systems, archaeological GIS, spatial analysis, spatial queries, digital elevation model, map algebra, visibility analysis, network analysis, hydrological modeling, erosion modeling, metadata, cultural resource management, database design
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
