利用机器学习方法和计算机视觉算法对屠宰切口和鳄鱼牙印进行高精度分类

IF 1.6 4区 地球科学 Q2 PALEONTOLOGY
Natalia Abellán , Enrique Baquedano , Manuel Domínguez-Rodrigo
{"title":"利用机器学习方法和计算机视觉算法对屠宰切口和鳄鱼牙印进行高精度分类","authors":"Natalia Abellán ,&nbsp;Enrique Baquedano ,&nbsp;Manuel Domínguez-Rodrigo","doi":"10.1016/j.geobios.2022.07.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Some researchers using traditional taphonomic criteria (groove shape and presence/absence of microstriations) have cast some doubts about the potential equifinality presented by crocodile tooth marks and stone tool butchery cut marks. Other researchers have argued that multivariate methods can efficiently separate both types of marks. Differentiating both taphonomic agents is crucial for determining the earliest evidence of carcass processing by hominins. Here, we use an updated machine learning approach (discarding artificially bootstrapping the original imbalanced samples) to show that microscopic features shaped as categorical variables, corresponding to intrinsic properties of mark structure, can accurately discriminate both types of bone modifications. We also implement new deep-learning methods that objectively achieve the highest accuracy in differentiating cut marks from crocodile tooth scores (99% of testing sets). The present study shows that there are precise ways of differentiating both taphonomic agents, and this invites taphonomists to apply them to controversial paleontological and archaeological specimens.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55116,"journal":{"name":"Geobios","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"High-accuracy in the classification of butchery cut marks and crocodile tooth marks using machine learning methods and computer vision algorithms\",\"authors\":\"Natalia Abellán ,&nbsp;Enrique Baquedano ,&nbsp;Manuel Domínguez-Rodrigo\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.geobios.2022.07.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Some researchers using traditional taphonomic criteria (groove shape and presence/absence of microstriations) have cast some doubts about the potential equifinality presented by crocodile tooth marks and stone tool butchery cut marks. Other researchers have argued that multivariate methods can efficiently separate both types of marks. Differentiating both taphonomic agents is crucial for determining the earliest evidence of carcass processing by hominins. Here, we use an updated machine learning approach (discarding artificially bootstrapping the original imbalanced samples) to show that microscopic features shaped as categorical variables, corresponding to intrinsic properties of mark structure, can accurately discriminate both types of bone modifications. We also implement new deep-learning methods that objectively achieve the highest accuracy in differentiating cut marks from crocodile tooth scores (99% of testing sets). The present study shows that there are precise ways of differentiating both taphonomic agents, and this invites taphonomists to apply them to controversial paleontological and archaeological specimens.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55116,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geobios\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geobios\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016699522000377\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PALEONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geobios","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016699522000377","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PALEONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

一些研究人员使用传统的地形学标准(凹槽形状和微纹的存在/不存在)对鳄鱼牙印和石器屠宰切割印所呈现的潜在的等性提出了一些怀疑。其他研究人员认为,多元方法可以有效地分离这两种类型的标记。区分这两种埋藏因子对于确定古人类加工尸体的最早证据至关重要。在这里,我们使用了一种更新的机器学习方法(放弃人工引导原始不平衡样本)来表明,作为分类变量的微观特征,对应于标记结构的内在属性,可以准确地区分两种类型的骨修饰。我们还实现了新的深度学习方法,客观上在区分切割痕迹和鳄鱼牙齿分数方面达到了最高的准确率(99%的测试集)。目前的研究表明,有精确的方法来区分这两种埋藏物,这促使埋藏物学家将它们应用于有争议的古生物和考古标本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
High-accuracy in the classification of butchery cut marks and crocodile tooth marks using machine learning methods and computer vision algorithms

Some researchers using traditional taphonomic criteria (groove shape and presence/absence of microstriations) have cast some doubts about the potential equifinality presented by crocodile tooth marks and stone tool butchery cut marks. Other researchers have argued that multivariate methods can efficiently separate both types of marks. Differentiating both taphonomic agents is crucial for determining the earliest evidence of carcass processing by hominins. Here, we use an updated machine learning approach (discarding artificially bootstrapping the original imbalanced samples) to show that microscopic features shaped as categorical variables, corresponding to intrinsic properties of mark structure, can accurately discriminate both types of bone modifications. We also implement new deep-learning methods that objectively achieve the highest accuracy in differentiating cut marks from crocodile tooth scores (99% of testing sets). The present study shows that there are precise ways of differentiating both taphonomic agents, and this invites taphonomists to apply them to controversial paleontological and archaeological specimens.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Geobios
Geobios 地学-古生物学
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
28
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Geobios publishes bimonthly in English original peer-reviewed articles of international interest in any area of paleontology, paleobiology, paleoecology, paleobiogeography, (bio)stratigraphy and biogeochemistry. All taxonomic groups are treated, including microfossils, invertebrates, plants, vertebrates and ichnofossils. Geobios welcomes descriptive papers based on original material (e.g. large Systematic Paleontology works), as well as more analytically and/or methodologically oriented papers, provided they offer strong and significant biochronological/biostratigraphical, paleobiogeographical, paleobiological and/or phylogenetic new insights and perspectices. A high priority level is given to synchronic and/or diachronic studies based on multi- or inter-disciplinary approaches mixing various fields of Earth and Life Sciences. Works based on extant data are also considered, provided they offer significant insights into geological-time studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信