Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T19:15:27.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Use of Bayesian Statistics for 14C Dates of Chronologically Ordered Samples: A Critical Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

Peter Steier  and
Werner Rom
Peter Steier
Affiliation:
Vienna Environmental Research Accelerator, Institut für Radiumforschung und Kernphysik, Universität Wien, Währinger Strasse 17, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. Email: peter.steier@univie.ac.at
Werner Rom
Affiliation:
Vienna Environmental Research Accelerator, Institut für Radiumforschung und Kernphysik, Universität Wien, Währinger Strasse 17, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. Email: peter.steier@univie.ac.at
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Bayesian mathematics provides a tool for combining radiocarbon dating results on findings from an archaeological context with independent archaeological information such as the chronological order, which may be inferred from stratigraphy. The goal is to arrive at both a more precise and a more accurate date. However, by means of simulated measurements we will show that specific assumptions about prior probabilities—implemented in calibration programs and not evident to the user—may create artifacts. This may result in dates with higher precision but lower accuracy, and which are no longer in agreement with the true ages of the findings.

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , 2000 , pp. 183 - 198
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Bayes, T. 1763. An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of chances. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 53:370–418. A postscript and a LaTe? source file version of this paper are available at URL: <http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/maths/histstat/essay.ps> and <http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/maths/histstat/essay.htm>, respectively.Google Scholar
Bayliss, A, Bronk Ramsey, C, McCormac, FG. 1997. Dating Stonehenge. In: Cunliffe, B, Renfrew, C, editors. Science and Stonehenge. Oxford: Oxford University Press. The corresponding OxCal program code is accessible at URL: <http://www.eng-h.gov.uk/stoneh/codemain.htm>.Google Scholar
Blobel, V, Lohrmann, E. 1998. Statistische und numerische Methoden der Datenanalyse. Stuttgart; Leipzig: B.G. Teubner. p 204–9.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 1995a. Radiocarbon calibration and analysis of stratigraphy: the OxCal program. Radiocarbon 37(2):425–30.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 1995b. OxCal Program v2.18. URL: <http://units.ox.ac.uk/departments/rlaha/oxcal/oxcal_h.html>..>Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 1999. An introduction to the use of Bayesian statistics in the interpretation of radiocarbon dates. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Frontiers in Accelerator Mass Spectrometry. 6–8 Jan 1999. National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba. National Museum of Japanese History, Sakura. Japan. p 151–60.Google Scholar
Buck, CE, Cavanagh, WG, Litton, CD. 1996. Bayesian approach to interpreting archaeological data. Chichester, New York, Brisbane, Toronto, Tokyo, Singapore: John Wiley & Sons. 382 p.Google Scholar
Buck, CE, Litton, CD, Scott, EM. 1994. Making the most of radiocarbon dating: some statistical considerations. Antiquity 68:252–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buck, CE, Litton, CD, Smith, AFM. 1992. Calibration of radiocarbon results pertaining to related archaeological events. Journal of Archaeological Science 19:497–512.Google Scholar
Buck, CE, Kenworthy, JB, Litton, CD, Smith, AFM. 1991. Combining archaeological and radiocarbon information: a Bayesian approach to calibration. Antiquity 65: 808–21.Google Scholar
Goslar, T, Wieslaw, M. 1998. Using the Bayesian method to study the precision of dating by wiggle-matching. Radiocarbon 40(1):551–60.Google Scholar
Litton, CD, Buck, CE. 1995. Review article – The Bayesian approach to the interpretation of archaeological data. Archaeometry 37(1):1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
May, RM. 1996. Wie viele Arten von Lebewesen gibt es? In: König, B, Linsenmair, KE, editors. Biologische Vielfalt . Heidelberg, Berlin, Oxford: Spektrum Akademischer Verlag GmbH. p 16–23.Google Scholar
Reece, R. 1994. Are Bayesian statistics useful to archaeological reasoning? Antiquity 68:848–50.Google Scholar
Roe, BP. 1992. Probability and statistics in experimental physics. New York: Springer-Verlag. p 103–5.Google Scholar
Stuiver, M, Reimer, PJ, Bard, E, Beck, JW, Burr, GS, Hughen, KA, Kromer, B, McCormac, G, Van der Plicht, J, Spurk, M. 1998. INTCAL98 radiocarbon age calibration, 24,000–0 cal BP. Radiocarbon 40(3):1041–83.Google Scholar