The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Middle Palaeolithic research in Romania. Past and current issues
Abstract
This paper presents some new results concerning the Middle Palaeolithic in Romania. Recent research on loess‐ paleosoil sequences and tephra deposits has provided an accurate picture on the geochronology of the Pleistocene. Reliable absolute ages indicate that some Middle Palaeolithic occupations are much older than previously assumed, namely they date back to the Middle Pleistocene. Lithic industries, both coming from old and recent excavations were (re) interpreted from new perspectives, other than cultural-historical ones. The study of fauna still leaves to be desired, as it needs to go beyond mere taxa identification. Many loci that have yielded surface collections of lithics that could belong to the Middle Palaeolithic indicate a great potential for discovering new sites in Romania.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“These caves were not just simple shelters, but functional points in a complex network of mobility and resource exploitation [6–14].”
From Tracing neanderthal mobility through the romanian carpathians: a GIS-based least-cost connectivity model (2025) · cites this paper as [14]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Murătoreanu, G., & Cosac, M. (2025) · PLOS One · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0334149 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Doboş, A.
- Venue
- Materiale şi cercetãri arheologice (Serie nouã)
- Publisher
- PERSEE Program
- Published
- 2017
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 5-14
- ISSN
- 1220-5222
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Language
- fr
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
