Entropology:理解考古数据的信息论方法

IF 3.2 1区 历史学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
Paula Gheorghiade, Vaiva Vasiliauskaite, Aleksandr Diachenko, Henry Price, Tim Evans, Ray Rivers
{"title":"Entropology:理解考古数据的信息论方法","authors":"Paula Gheorghiade, Vaiva Vasiliauskaite, Aleksandr Diachenko, Henry Price, Tim Evans, Ray Rivers","doi":"10.1007/s10816-023-09627-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The main objective of this paper is to develop quantitative measures for describing the diversity, homogeneity, and similarity of archaeological data. It presents new approaches to characterize the relationship between archaeological assemblages by utilizing entropy and its related attributes, primarily diversity, and by drawing inspiration from ecology. Our starting premise is that diachronic changes in our data provide a distorted reflection of social processes and that spatial differences in data indicate cultural distancing. To investigate this premise, we adopt a parsimonious approach for comparing assemblage profiles employing and comparing a range of (Hill) diversities, which enable us to exploit different aspects of the data. The modelling is tested on two seemingly large datasets: a Late Bronze Age Cretan dataset with circa 13,700 entries (compiled by PG); and a 4<sup>th</sup> millennium Western Tripolye dataset with circa 25,000 entries (compiled by AD). The contrast between the strongly geographically and culturally heterogeneous Bronze Age Crete and the strongly homogeneous Western Tripolye culture in the Southern Bug and Dnieper interfluve show the successes and limitations of our approach. Despite the seemingly large size of our datasets, these data highlight limitations that confine their utility to non-semantic analysis. This requires us to consider different ways of treating and aggregating assemblages, either as censuses or samples, contingent upon the degree of representativeness of the data. While our premise, that changes in data reflect societal changes, is supported, it is not definitively confirmed. Consequently, this paper also exemplifies the limitations of large archaeological datasets for such analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":47725,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","volume":"74 19","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Entropology: an Information-Theoretic Approach to Understanding Archaeological Data\",\"authors\":\"Paula Gheorghiade, Vaiva Vasiliauskaite, Aleksandr Diachenko, Henry Price, Tim Evans, Ray Rivers\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10816-023-09627-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The main objective of this paper is to develop quantitative measures for describing the diversity, homogeneity, and similarity of archaeological data. It presents new approaches to characterize the relationship between archaeological assemblages by utilizing entropy and its related attributes, primarily diversity, and by drawing inspiration from ecology. Our starting premise is that diachronic changes in our data provide a distorted reflection of social processes and that spatial differences in data indicate cultural distancing. To investigate this premise, we adopt a parsimonious approach for comparing assemblage profiles employing and comparing a range of (Hill) diversities, which enable us to exploit different aspects of the data. The modelling is tested on two seemingly large datasets: a Late Bronze Age Cretan dataset with circa 13,700 entries (compiled by PG); and a 4<sup>th</sup> millennium Western Tripolye dataset with circa 25,000 entries (compiled by AD). The contrast between the strongly geographically and culturally heterogeneous Bronze Age Crete and the strongly homogeneous Western Tripolye culture in the Southern Bug and Dnieper interfluve show the successes and limitations of our approach. Despite the seemingly large size of our datasets, these data highlight limitations that confine their utility to non-semantic analysis. This requires us to consider different ways of treating and aggregating assemblages, either as censuses or samples, contingent upon the degree of representativeness of the data. While our premise, that changes in data reflect societal changes, is supported, it is not definitively confirmed. Consequently, this paper also exemplifies the limitations of large archaeological datasets for such analyses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47725,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory\",\"volume\":\"74 19\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-023-09627-4\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-023-09627-4","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文的主要目的是开发定量测量方法来描述考古数据的多样性、同质性和相似性。它通过利用熵及其相关属性,主要是多样性,并从生态学中汲取灵感,提出了表征考古组合之间关系的新方法。我们的出发点是,我们数据中的历时性变化提供了社会过程的扭曲反映,数据中的空间差异表明了文化距离。为了研究这一前提,我们采用了一种简约的方法来比较组合剖面,采用并比较了一系列(Hill)多样性,这使我们能够利用数据的不同方面。该模型在两个看似庞大的数据集上进行了测试:青铜时代晚期的克里特岛数据集,约有13700个条目(由PG汇编);以及第4个千年西部Tripolye数据集,约有25000个条目(由AD汇编)。地理和文化上高度异质的青铜时代克里特岛与南布格和第聂伯河流域高度同质的西部特里波利文化之间的对比表明了我们方法的成功和局限性。尽管我们的数据集看起来很大,但这些数据突出了限制其应用于非语义分析的局限性。这要求我们根据数据的代表性程度,考虑不同的方式来处理和汇总集合,无论是人口普查还是样本。虽然我们的前提,即数据的变化反映了社会的变化,得到了支持,但这并没有得到确切的证实。因此,本文还举例说明了大型考古数据集在此类分析中的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Entropology: an Information-Theoretic Approach to Understanding Archaeological Data

The main objective of this paper is to develop quantitative measures for describing the diversity, homogeneity, and similarity of archaeological data. It presents new approaches to characterize the relationship between archaeological assemblages by utilizing entropy and its related attributes, primarily diversity, and by drawing inspiration from ecology. Our starting premise is that diachronic changes in our data provide a distorted reflection of social processes and that spatial differences in data indicate cultural distancing. To investigate this premise, we adopt a parsimonious approach for comparing assemblage profiles employing and comparing a range of (Hill) diversities, which enable us to exploit different aspects of the data. The modelling is tested on two seemingly large datasets: a Late Bronze Age Cretan dataset with circa 13,700 entries (compiled by PG); and a 4th millennium Western Tripolye dataset with circa 25,000 entries (compiled by AD). The contrast between the strongly geographically and culturally heterogeneous Bronze Age Crete and the strongly homogeneous Western Tripolye culture in the Southern Bug and Dnieper interfluve show the successes and limitations of our approach. Despite the seemingly large size of our datasets, these data highlight limitations that confine their utility to non-semantic analysis. This requires us to consider different ways of treating and aggregating assemblages, either as censuses or samples, contingent upon the degree of representativeness of the data. While our premise, that changes in data reflect societal changes, is supported, it is not definitively confirmed. Consequently, this paper also exemplifies the limitations of large archaeological datasets for such analyses.

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
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.70%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: The Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, the leading journal in its field,  presents original articles that address method- or theory-focused issues of current archaeological interest and represent significant explorations on the cutting edge of the discipline.   The journal also welcomes topical syntheses that critically assess and integrate research on a specific subject in archaeological method or theory, as well as examinations of the history of archaeology.    Written by experts, the articles benefit an international audience of archaeologists, students of archaeology, and practitioners of closely related disciplines.  Specific topics covered in recent issues include:  the use of nitche construction theory in archaeology,  new developments in the use of soil chemistry in archaeological interpretation, and a model for the prehistoric development of clothing.  The Journal''s distinguished Editorial Board includes archaeologists with worldwide archaeological knowledge (the Americas, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, and Africa), and expertise in a wide range of methodological and theoretical issues.  Rated ''A'' in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory is rated ''A'' in the ERIH, a new reference index that aims to help evenly access the scientific quality of Humanities research output. For more information visit: http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/activities/research-infrastructures.html Rated ''A'' in the Australian Research Council Humanities and Creative Arts Journal List.  For more information, visit: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list_dev.htm
×
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