Year-end Sale % OFF 
Abstract
The analysis of bone surface modifications (BSMs) is a prominent part of paleoanthropological studies, namely taphonomic research. Behavioral interpretations of the fossil record hinge strongly upon correct assessment of BSMs. With the significant impact of microscopic analysis to the study of BSMs, multiple authors have discussed the reliability of these technological improvements for gaining resolution in BSM discrimination. While a certain optimism is present, some important questions are ignored and others overemphasized without appropriate empirical support. This specifically affects the study of cut marks. A diversity of geometric morphometric approaches applied to the study of cut marks have resulted in the coexistence (and competition) of different 2D and 3D methods. The present work builds upon the foundation of experiments presented by Maté-González et al. (2015), Courtenay et al. (2017) and Otárola-Castillo et al. (2018) to contrast for the first time 2D and 3D methods in their resolution of cut mark interpretation and classification. The results presented here show that both approaches are equally valid and that the use of sophisticated 3D methods do not contribute to an improvement in accuracy.
Highlights
Cut mark analysis has had a long history in archaeology
At the beginning of the 20th century, the first experimental works oriented towards explaining these bone surface modifications (BSMs) found in multiple French Palaeolithic sites came to light (Martin, 1906; Martin, 1907; Martin, 1909; Martin, 1907-10)
These results are strongly supported by the numeric results presented in Tables 2 and 3 through significant p values in the case of the Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) tests and at least 95.83% of the sample being correctly classified in the confusion matrix in the Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA)
Summary
Cut mark analysis has had a long history in archaeology. At the beginning of the 20th century, the first experimental works oriented towards explaining these bone surface modifications (BSMs) found in multiple French Palaeolithic sites came to light (Martin, 1906; Martin, 1907; Martin, 1909; Martin, 1907-10). Research in this area, went by unnoticed at least until the second half of the 20th century.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
