Predicting Flake Mass: A View from Machine Learning

References

• Andrefsky, W. (2005). Lithics macroscopic approaches to analysis, second ed, Cambridge manuals in archaeology. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Archer, W., Pop, C. M., Rezek, Z., Schlager, S., Lin, S. C., Weiss, M., Dogandžić, T., Desta, D., & McPherron, S. P. (2018). A geometric morphometric relationship predicts stone flake shape and size variability. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 10(8), 1991–2003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-017-0517-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagolini, B. (1968). Ricerche sulle dimensioni dei manufatti litici preistorici non ritoccati. Annali dell’Università di Ferrara : nuova serie, Sezione XV. Paleontologia Umana e Paletnologia, 1, 195–219.
   Google Scholar
• Bamforth, D. B. (1986). Technological efficiency and tool curation. American Antiquity, 51(1), 38–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/280392
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binford, L. R. (1973). Interassemblage variability – the Mousterian and the ‘functional’ argument. In C. Renfrew (Ed.), The explanation of culture change. Models in prehistory (pp. 227–254). Duckworth.
   Google Scholar
• Binford, L. R. (1979). Organization and formation processes: Looking at curated technologies. Journal of Anthropological Research, 35(3), 255–273. https://doi.org/10.1086/jar.35.3.3629902
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, D. R., Rogers, M. J., Harris, J. W. K., & Walker, S. J. (2008). Landscape-scale variation in hominin tool use: Evidence from the developed Oldowan. Journal of Human Evolution, 55(6), 1053–1063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2008.05.020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bustos-Pérez, G., & Baena, J. (2019). Exploring volume lost in retouched artifacts using height of retouch and length of retouched edge. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 27, 101922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2019.101922
   Google Scholar
• Casamiquela, R. M. (1978). Temas patagónicos de interes arqueológico. La talla del vidrio. Relaciones de la Sociedad Argentina de Antropología, 12, 213–223.
   Google Scholar
• Clarkson, C., & Hiscock, P. (2011). Estimating original flake mass from 3D scans of platform area. Journal of Archaeological Science, 38(5), 1062–1068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2010.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cotterell, B., & Kamminga, J. (1987). The formation of flakes. American Antiquity, 52(4), 675–708. https://doi.org/10.2307/281378
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, Z. J., & Shea, J. J. (1998). Quantifying lithic curation: An experimental test of Dibble and Pelcin’s original flake-tool mass predictor. Journal of Archaeological Science, 25(7), 603–610. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1997.0255
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dibble, H. L. (1987). The interpretation of middle Paleolithic scraper morphology. American Antiquity, 52(1), 109–117. https://doi.org/10.2307/281062
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dibble, H. L. (1995). Middle Paleolithic scraper reduction: Background, clarification, and review of the evidence to date. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 2(4), 299–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02229003
   Google Scholar
• Dibble, H. L. (1997). Platform variability and flake morphology: A comparison of experimental and archaeological data and implications for interpreting prehistoric lithic technological strategies. Lithic Technology, 22(2), 150–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/01977261.1997.11754540
   Google Scholar
• Dibble, H. L. (1998). Comment on “Quantifying lithic curation: An experimental test of Dibble and Pelcin’s original flake-tool mass predictor”, by Zachary J. Davis and John J. Shea. Journal of Archaeological Science, 25(7), 611–613. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1997.0254
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dibble, H. L., & Pelcin, A. (1995). The effect of hammer mass and velocity on flake mass. Journal of Archaeological Science, 22(3), 429–439. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1995.0042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dibble, H. L., & Whittaker, J. C. (1981). New experimental evidence on the relation between percussion flaking and flake variation. Journal of Archaeological Science, 8(3), 283–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-4403(81)90004-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dogandžić, T., Braun, D. R., & McPherron, S. P. (2015). Edge length and surface area of a blank: Experimental assessment of measures, size predictions and utility. PLoS ONE, 10, e0133984. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133984
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eren, M. I., Domínguez-Rodrigo, M., Kuhn, S. L., Adler, D. S., Le, I., & Bar-Yosef, O. (2005). Defining and measuring reduction in unifacial stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Science, 32(8), 1190–1201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2005.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eren, M. I., & Lycett, S. J. (2012). Why Levallois? A morphometric comparison of experimental ‘preferential’ Levallois flakes versus debitage flakes. PLoS One, 7(1), e29273. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0029273
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furnival, G. M., & Wilson, R. W. (1974). Regressions by leaps and bounds. Technometrics, 16(4), 499–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1974.10489231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gould, R. A. (1968). Living archaeology: The Ngatatjara of Western Australia. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 24(2), 101–122. https://doi.org/10.1086/soutjanth.24.2.3629417
   Google Scholar
• Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., & Friedman, J. (2009). The elements of statistical learning. Data mining, inference, and prediction, second edition. ed, Springer series in statistics. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Hayden, B., & Nelson, M. (1981). The use of chipped lithic material in the contemporary Maya Highlands. American Antiquity, 46(4), 885–898. https://doi.org/10.2307/280114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiscock, P., & Clarkson, C. (2005). Experimental evaluation of Kuhn’s geometric index of reduction and the flat-flake problem. Journal of Archaeological Science, 32(7), 1015–1022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2005.02.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiscock, P., & Tabrett, A. (2010). Generalization, inference and the quantification of lithic reduction. World Archaeology, 42(4), 545–561. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2010.517669
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hocking, R. R., & Leslie, R. N. (1967). Selection of the best subset in regression analysis. Technometrics, 9(4), 531–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1967.10490502
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, G., Witten, D., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2013). An introduction to statistical learning, Springer texts in statistics. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, M. (2008). Building predictive models in R using the caret package. Journal of Statistical Software, 28. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v028.i05
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, S. L. (1990). A geometric index of reduction for unifacial stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Science, 17(5), 583–593. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-4403(90)90038-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, S. L. (1992). On planning and curated technologies in the Middle Paleolithic. Journal of Anthropological Research, 48(3), 185–214. https://doi.org/10.1086/jar.48.3.3630634
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lumley based on Fortran code by Alan Miller, T. (2020). leaps: Regression subset selection.
   Google Scholar
• Mallows, C. L. (1973). Some comments on Cp. Technometrics, 15, 661–675. https://doi.org/10.2307/1267380
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwick, B. (2008). What attributes are important for the measurement of assemblage reduction intensity? Results from an experimental stone artefact assemblage with relevance to the Hoabinhian of mainland Southeast Asia. Journal of Archaeological Science, 35(5), 1189–1200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2007.08.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwick, B. (2017). Computational reproducibility in archaeological research: Basic principles and a case study of their implementation. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 24(2), 424–450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-015-9272-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morales, J. I., Lorenzo, C., & Vergès, J. M. (2015). Measuring retouch intensity in lithic tools: A new proposal using 3D scan data. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 22(2), 543–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-013-9189-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muller, A., & Clarkson, C. (2016). A new method for accurately and precisely measuring flake platform area. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 8, 178–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2016.06.015
   Google Scholar
• Pelcin, A. W. (1997). The effect of core surface morphology on flake attributes: Evidence from a controlled experiment. Journal of Archaeological Science, 24(8), 749–756. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1996.0156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pelcin, A. W. (1998). The threshold effect of platform width: A reply to Davis and Shea. Journal of Archaeological Science, 25(7), 615–620. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1997.0253
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, D. (2014). broom: An R Package for converting statistical analysis objects into tidy data frames. arXiv: Computation. https://doi.org/1412.3565
   Google Scholar
• Rolland, N., & Dibble, H. L. (1990). A new synthesis of Middle Paleolithic variability. American Antiquity, 55(3), 480–499. https://doi.org/10.2307/281279
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RStudio Team. (2019). RStudio: Integrated development for R. RStudio, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Scerri, E. M. L., Gravina, B., Blinkhorn, J., & Delagnes, A. (2016). Can lithic attribute analyses identify discrete reduction trajectories? A quantitative study using refitted lithic sets. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 23(2), 669–691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-015-9255-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shott, M. J. (1989). On tool-class use lives and the formation of archaeological assemblages. American Antiquity, 54(1), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.2307/281329
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shott, M. J. (1996). An exegesis of the curation concept. Journal of Anthropological Research, 52(3), 259–280. https://doi.org/10.1086/jar.52.3.3630085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shott, M. J. (2005). The reduction thesis and its discontents: Overview of the volume. In C. Clarkson & L. Lamb (Eds.), Lithics “Down Under”: Australian perspectives on Lithic reduction, use and classification, BAR International Series. British Archaeological Reports (pp. 109–125).
   Google Scholar
• Shott, M. J. (2007). The role of reduction analysis in lithic studies. Lithic Technology, 32(1), 131–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/01977261.2007.11721048
   Google Scholar
• Shott, M. J., Bradbury, A. P., Carr, P. J., & Odell, G. H. (2000). Flake size from platform attributes: Predictive and empirical approaches. Journal of Archaeological Science, 27(10), 877–894. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1999.0499
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shott, M. J., & Seeman, M. F. (2017). Use and multifactorial reconciliation of uniface reduction measures: A pilot study at the Nobles Pond Paleoindian Site. American Antiquity, 82(4), 723–741. https://doi.org/10.1017/aaq.2017.40
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shott, M. J., & Weedman, K. J. (2007). Measuring reduction in stone tools: An ethnoarchaeological study of Gamo hidescrapers from Ethiopia. Journal of Archaeological Science, 34(7), 1016–1035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2006.09.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, J. P. (1967). Ethno-archaeology in New Guinea: Two examples. Mankind, 6, 409–414. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-9310.1967.tb01027.x
   Google Scholar
• Wickham, H., Averick, M., Bryan, J., Chang, W., McGowan, L., François, R., Grolemund, G., Hayes, A., Henry, L., Hester, J., Kuhn, M., Pedersen, T., Miller, E., Bache, S., Müller, K., Ooms, J., Robinson, D., Seidel, D., Spinu, V., … Yutani, H. (2019). Welcome to the tidyverse. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(43), 1686. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01686
   Google Scholar