Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T07:36:18.742Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improved Radiocarbon Age Estimation Using the Bootstrap

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

Amir D. Aczel
Amir D. Aczel*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematical Sciences, Bentley College, Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This paper proposes the use of the statistical bootstrap technique as an aid in combining radiocarbon date estimates The rationale for the use of the bootstrap is the theoretical result that, even if individual date estimates are normally distributed, their combination by the usual formula results in a random quantity that is not normal but rather a mixture of distributions. The bootstrap is a non-parametric, computer-intensive technique. This technique can better estimate the actual distribution of the combined age, leading to more precise confidence intervals. While the bootstrap cannot solve the multiple-intercepts problem in calibration, it can nonetheless lead to better estimates. The benefits of using the bootstrap are especially noticeable when sample sizes are small (as is the case in other applications of this technique).

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 37 , Issue 3 , 1995 , pp. 845 - 849
Copyright
Copyright © The American Journal of Science 

References

Aitken, M. J. 1988. The Thera eruption: Continuing discussion of the dating. Archaeometry 30: 165–169.Google Scholar
Arcones, M. and Gine, E. 1992 The bootstrap of M-estimates. In LePage, R. and Billard, L., eds., Exploring the Limits of Bootstrap. New York, John Wiley & Sons: 426 p.Google Scholar
Bickel, P. J. and Freedman, D. A. 1981 Some asymptotic theory for the bootstrap. Annals of Statistics 9: 1196–1217.Google Scholar
Damon, P. E., Donahue, D. J., Gore, B. H., Hatheway, A. L., Jull, A. J. T., Linick, T. W., Sercel, P. J., Toolin, L. J., Bronk, C. R., Hall, E. T., Hedges, R. E. M., Housley, R., Law, I. A., Perry, C., Bonani, G., Trumbore, S., Woelfli, W., Ambers, J. C., Bowman, S. G. E., Leese, M. N. and Tite, M. S. 1989 Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin. Nature 337: 611–615.Google Scholar
Efron, B. 1979. Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife. Annals of Statistics 7: 1–26.Google Scholar
Efron, B. 1982 The Jackknife, the Bootstrap, and Other Resampling Schemes. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Society of Industrial and Applied Mathematics: 92 p.Google Scholar
Efron, B. 1987 Better bootstrap confidence intervals. Journal of the American Statistical Association 82: 171–185.Google Scholar
Efron, B. and Tibshirani, R. 1986 Bootstrap methods for standard errors, confidence intervals, and other measures of statistical accuracy. Statistical Science 1: 54–77.Google Scholar
Efron, B. and Tibshirani, R. 1993 An Introduction to the Bootstrap. New York, Chapman and Hall: 436 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, P. 1988 Theoretical comparison of bootstrap confidence intervals. Annals of Statistics 16: 927–952.Google Scholar
Hall, P. 1992 The Bootstrap and Edgeworth Expansion. New York, Springer-Verlag: 352 p.Google Scholar
Kempthorne, P., Mukhopadhyay, N., Sen, P. K. and Zacks, S. 1991 Research, a panel discussion. Statistical Science 6: 149–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michael, H. N. and Betancourt, P. 1988. The Thera eruption: Further arguments for an early date. Archaeometry 30: 169–174.Google Scholar
Serfling, R. J. 1980 Approximation Theorems of Mathematical Statistics. New York, John Wiley & Sons: 371 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, K. 1981 On the asymptotic accuracy of Efron's bootstrap. Annals of Statistics 9: 1187–1195.Google Scholar
Stuiver, M. and Pearson, G. W. 1986 High-precision calibration of the radiocarbon time scale, AD 1950–500 BC. In Stuiver, M. and Kra, R., eds., Proceedings of the 12th International 14C Conference. Radiocarbon 28, (2B): 805–838.Google Scholar
Ward, G. K. and Wilson, S. R. 1978. Procedures for comparing and combining radiocarbon age determinations: A critique. Archaeometry 20: 19–31.Google Scholar