Cited by 8,725Archaeology and ancient environmental studiesGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchTree-ring climate responses

Bayesian Analysis of Radiocarbon Dates

Open access
Bronk Ramsey, Christopher·2009·Radiocarbon

Abstract

If radiocarbon measurements are to be used at all for chronological purposes, we have to use statistical methods for calibration. The most widely used method of calibration can be seen as a simple application of Bayesian statistics, which uses both the information from the new measurement and information from the 14 C calibration curve. In most dating applications, however, we have larger numbers of 14 C measurements and we wish to relate those to events in the past. Bayesian statistics provides a coherent framework in which such analysis can be performed and is becoming a core element in many 14 C dating projects. This article gives an overview of the main model components used in chronological analysis, their mathematical formulation, and examples of how such analyses can be performed using the latest version of the OxCal software (v4). Many such models can be put together, in a modular fashion, from simple elements, with defined constraints and groupings. In other cases, the commonly used “uniform phase” models might not be appropriate, and ramped, exponential, or normal distributions of events might be more useful. When considering analyses of these kinds, it is useful to be able run simulations on synthetic data. Methods for performing such tests are discussed here along with other methods of diagnosing possible problems with statistical models of this kind.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033822200033865

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Agreement between the posterior and prior distributions follows the OxCal v4.1 convention in which 60% is the threshold for acceptance for individual and overall agreement indices.

    “The agreement between the posterior distribution of the data and the prior distribution follows the convention of OxCal ν 4.1 where 60% is taken as the threshold for acceptance for individual and overall agreement indices”

    From Chronology of the Early Bronze Age in the Southern Levant: New Analysis for a High Chronology (2012) · cites this paper as Bronk Ramsey 2009

    In “Inconsistencies Between Measurements and the Model,” the paper describes an individual agreement index with a reasonable minimum acceptable value around 60%, and says overall indices falling much below 60% warrant investigation. It does not present 60% as a firm acceptance threshold: it explicitly says the agreement-index approach has no well-defined cut-off. The comparison is between posterior distributions under the full model and a null prior, rather than simply between a posterior and a prior distribution. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The OxCal modelling of the destruction and specific use event Phases as exponentially distributed towards the end of the Phase, with the destruction/event as the Boundary immediately following, likely accurately describes the data, including not over-estimating the age because of a few older/residual samples.

    “The OxCal modelling of the destruction and specific use event Phases as exponentially distributed towards the end of the Phase, with the destruction/event as the Boundary immediately following, thus likely accurately describes the data, including, but not over-estimating the age because of a few samples that are older, residual, or include more substantial in-built age (e.g.wood charcoal that is”

    From Second Intermediate Period date for the Thera (Santorini) eruption and historical implications (2022) · cites this paper as [57]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Large datasets covering long, continuous stratigraphic sequences are best able to contribute to chronological debates, since prior knowledge of relative order can be used to constrain radiocarbon probabilities using Bayesian statistics.

    “Large datasets covering long, continuous stratigraphic sequences are best able to contribute to chronological debates, since prior knowledge of relative order can be used to constrain the radiocarbon probabilities using Bayesian statistics [116–118].”

    From The chronology of Gezer from the end of the late bronze age to iron age II: A meeting point for radiocarbon, archaeology egyptology and the Bible (2023) · cites this paper as [118]

    The Relative Constraints section explains that stratigraphic order can be incorporated as a prior in Bayesian chronological models. The Multiple Phases section calls analyses with well-defined stratigraphic constraints especially robust and powerful, but it does not say that datasets must be large or cover long, continuous sequences to contribute most to chronological debates. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Using OxCal with IntCal20 and no adjustments for geographical location, the Kenyon samples yield calibrated dates ranging from 1699-1623 calBC (70.3% probability, GrN-18368) to 1617-1531 calBC (95.4% probability, GrN-18539), with the outlier GrN-18538 at 2031-1899 calBC (95.4% probability).

    “Using OxCal with IntCal20 and no adjustments for geographical location, these samples would yield calibrated dates ranging from 1699 to 1623 calBC 70.3% probability (GrN-18368) to 1617-1531 calBC 95.4% probability (GrN-18539), with the outlier (GrN-18538) 2031-1899 calBC 95.4% probability”

    From The Bronze Age Destruction of Jericho, Archaeology, and the Book of Joshua (2023) · cites this paper as Bronk Ramsey 2009, pp.337-60

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • OxCal implements a comprehensive Bayesian chronological modelling approach that permits definition of probability regions and robust outlier detection.

    “the OxCal software implements a comprehensive Bayesian chronological modelling approach [62]; among other things, this permits definition of probability regions and robust outlier detection [62, 63].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Bayliss A, Whittle A, editors. 2007. Histories of the dead: building chronologies for five southern British long barrows [special issue]. Cambridge Archaeolog- ical Journal 17(Supplement S1).
  2. Bowman SGE, Leese MN. 1995. Radiocarbon calibra- tion: current issues. American Journal of Archaeology 99(1):102-5.
  3. Buck CE, Millard A. 2004. Tools for Constructing Chro- nologies: Crossing Disciplinary Boundaries. London: Springer. 257 p.
  4. Steier P, Rom W. 2000. The use of Bayesian statistics for 14 C dates of chronologically ordered samples: a criti- cal analysis. Radiocarbon 42(2):183-98.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bronk Ramsey, C.
Venue
Radiocarbon
Published
2009
Volume
51
Issue
1
Pages
337-360
ISSN
  • 0033-8222 (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-5755
OpenAlex
W2167452694
Cited by
8,725
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 549 · 2025: 606 · 2024: 663 · 2023: 724 · 2022: 680 · 2021: 757 · 2020: 651 · 2019: 589 · 2018: 556 · 2017: 607 · 2016: 434 · 2015: 441 · 2014: 438 · 2013: 412 · 2012: 273
FWCI
158.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Radiocarbon (publishedVersion)
  • UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Natural Environment Research Council (NE/E019129/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Geology and Paleoclimatology Research
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Tree-ring climate responses
Keywords
radiocarbon dating, Bayesian calibration, OxCal, chronological analysis, synthetic data simulation, model diagnostics, radiocarbon chronology

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