首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Testing accuracy in 2D and 3D geometric morphometric methods for cut mark identification and classification
【2h】

Testing accuracy in 2D and 3D geometric morphometric methods for cut mark identification and classification

机译:测试2D和3D几何形态计量学方法以进行切痕识别和分类的准确性

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The analysis of bone surface modifications (BSMs) is a prominent part of paleoanthropological studies, namely taphonomic research. Behavioral interpretations of the fossil record hinge strongly upon correct assessment of BSMs. With the significant impact of microscopic analysis to the study of BSMs, multiple authors have discussed the reliability of these technological improvements for gaining resolution in BSM discrimination. While a certain optimism is present, some important questions are ignored and others overemphasized without appropriate empirical support. This specifically affects the study of cut marks. A diversity of geometric morphometric approaches applied to the study of cut marks have resulted in the coexistence (and competition) of different 2D and 3D methods. The present work builds upon the foundation of experiments presented by , and to contrast for the first time 2D and 3D methods in their resolution of cut mark interpretation and classification. The results presented here show that both approaches are equally valid and that the use of sophisticated 3D methods do not contribute to an improvement in accuracy.
机译:骨表面修饰(BSM)的分析是古人类学研究(即,Tapolonomic研究)的重要部分。化石记录的行为解释在很大程度上取决于对BSM的正确评估。随着微观分析对BSM的研究产生重大影响,多位作者讨论了这些技术改进在BSM鉴别中获得解决方案的可靠性。尽管存在一定的乐观态度,但在没有适当的经验支持的情况下,一些重要的问题被忽略,而另一些则过分强调。这特别影响了切割痕迹的研究。用于切割痕迹研究的多种几何形态计量学方法导致了不同2D和3D方法的共存(和竞争)。目前的工作建立在,提出的实验的基础上,并且首次将2D和3D方法在切割标记解释和分类方面的对比进行了对比。此处显示的结果表明,这两种方法都是同等有效的,并且使用复杂的3D方法不会提高准确性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号