Abstract
Abstract. The outcomes of virtual reconstructions of archaeological monuments are not just images for aesthetic consumption but rather present a scholarly argument and decision making process. They are based on complex chains of reasoning grounded in primary and secondary evidence that enable a historically probable whole to be reconstructed from the partial remains left in the archaeological record. This paper will explore the possibilities for documenting and storing in an information system the phases of the reasoning, decision and procedures that a modeler, with the support of an archaeologist, uses during the virtual reconstruction process and how they can be linked to the reconstruction output. The goal is to present a documentation model such that the foundations of evidence for the reconstructed elements, and the reasoning around them, are made not only explicit and interrogable but also can be updated, extended and reused by other researchers in future work. Using as a case-study the reconstruction of a kitchen in a Roman domus in Grand, we will examine the necessary documentation requirements, and the capacity to express it using semantic technologies. For our study we adopt the CIDOC-CRM ontological model, and its extensions CRMinf, CRMBa and CRMgeo as a starting point for modelling the arguments and relations.
Highlights
In a media focused environment, where the knowledge and tools for the production of realistic, even hyper-realistic, images of reconstructed archaeological sites and monuments in two, three and four dimensions attracts a growing and diverse audience, the questions regarding the maintenance of a scholarly foundation of the virtual reconstruction process are a pressing concern
Modeling virtual reconstruction as a reasoning process based on a series of propositions, as we propose to do in our model, promises a distinct advantage in the retrievability of the provenance of knowledge
Our proposed solution was a generic documentation model, which captures the essential steps of the process and their relations
Summary
In a media focused environment, where the knowledge and tools for the production of realistic, even hyper-realistic, images of reconstructed archaeological sites and monuments in two, three and four dimensions attracts a growing and diverse audience, the questions regarding the maintenance of a scholarly foundation of the virtual reconstruction process are a pressing concern. It is because of and insofar as the virtual reconstruction process arrives at its conclusions - propositions supporting the restoration of some partial element as a complete whole - through a chain of reasoning founded on premises believed to be true, and through executing reasonable logical inferences that we can treat its outcome as an argument with strengths and weaknesses open to critical examination.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
