A valuable contribution to automated analysis of palaeolithic artefacts
Linking Scars: Topology-based Scar Detection and Graph Modeling of Paleolithic Artifacts in 3D
Recommendation: posted 27 December 2023, validated 10 January 2024
Hageneuer, S. (2023) A valuable contribution to automated analysis of palaeolithic artefacts. Peer Community in Archaeology, 100413. 10.24072/pci.archaeo.100413
In this paper (Linsel/Bullenkamp/Mara 2024), the authors propose an automatic system for scar-ridge-pattern detection on palaeolithic artefacts based on Morse Theory. Scare-Ridge pattern recognition is a process that is usually done manually while creating a drawing of the object itself. Automatic systems to detect scars or ridges exist, but only a small amount of them is utilizing 3D data. In addition to the scar-ridges detection, the authors also experiment in automatically detecting the operational sequence, the temporal relation between scars and ridges. As a result, they can export a traditional drawing as well as graph models displaying the relationships between the scars and ridges.
After an introduction to the project and the practice of documenting palaeolithic artefacts, the authors explain their procedure in automatising the analysis of scars and ridges as well as their temporal relation to each other on these artefacts. To illustrate the process, an open dataset of lithic artefacts from the Grotta di Fumane, Italy, was used and 62 artefacts selected. To establish a Ground Truth, the artefacts were first annotated manually. The authors then continue to explain in detail each step of the automated process that follows and the results obtained.
In the second part of the paper, the results are presented. First the results of the segmentation process shows that the average percentage of correctly labelled vertices is over 91%, which is a remarkable result. The graph modelling however shows some more difficulties, which the authors are aware of. To enhance the process, the authors rightfully aim to include datasets of experimental archaeology in the future. They also aim to develop a way of detecting the operational sequence automatically and precisely.
This paper has great potential as it showcases exactly what Digital and Computational Archaeology is about: The development of new digital methods to enhance the analysis of archaeological data. While this procedure is still in development, the authors were able to present a valuable contribution to the automatization of analytical archaeology. By creating a step towards the machine-readability of this data, they also open up the way to further steps in machine learning within Archaeology.
Linsel, F., Bullenkamp, J. P., and Mara, H. (2024). Linking Scars: Topology-based Scar Detection and Graph Modeling of Paleolithic Artifacts in 3D, Zenodo, 8296269, ver. 3 peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer Community in Archaeology. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8296269
The recommender in charge of the evaluation of the article and the reviewers declared that they have no conflict of interest (as defined in the code of conduct of PCI) with the authors or with the content of the article. The authors declared that they comply with the PCI rule of having no financial conflicts of interest in relation to the content of the article.
The research was directly funded by the Institute of Computer Science, Martin-Luther University Halle-Wittenberg-Halle, Germany.
Evaluation round #1
DOI or URL of the preprint: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8296269
Version of the preprint: 1
Author's Reply, 18 Dec 2023
Decision by Sebastian Hageneuer, posted 19 Oct 2023, validated 19 Oct 2023
The paper "Linking Scars: Topology-based Scar Detection and Graph Modeling of Paleolithic Artifacts in 3D" is a well-written and a highly intersting paper on the "lost voice of three-dimensionality" in documenting paleolithic artefacts. Although the paper in general is of great quality, some minor clarifications and corrections mentioned by the reviewers should be implemented.
I hereby ask the authors to take the constructive criticism of the two reviewers and implement it in their paper. I also ask the authors to provide a documentation of the changes made to the paper and upload it here on PCI Archaeology as a response.
We are looking forward to your updated version!