Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-kw2vx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-18T23:54:02.304Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New Methods and Critical Aspects in Bayesian Mathematics for 14C Calibration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

Peter Steier ,
Werner Rom  and
Stephan Puchegger
Peter Steier
Affiliation:
Vienna Environmental Research Accelerator, Institut für Isotopenforschung und Kernphysik, Universität Wien, Währinger Straße 17, A-1090 Wien, Austria. Email: [email protected].
Werner Rom
Affiliation:
AMS 14C Dating Laboratory, Institut for Fysik og Astronomi Aarhus Universitet, DK-8000 Ärhus C, Denmark
Stephan Puchegger
Affiliation:
Vienna Environmental Research Accelerator, Institut für Isotopenforschung und Kernphysik, Universität Wien, Währinger Straße 17, A-1090 Wien, Austria. Email: [email protected].
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.

The probabilistic radiocarbon calibration approach, which largely has replaced the intercept method in 14C dating, is based on the so-called Bayes' theorem (Bayes 1763). Besides single-sample calibration, Bayesian mathematics also supplies tools for combining 14C results of many samples with independent archaeological information such as typology or stratigraphy (Buck et al. 1996). However, specific assumptions in the “prior probabilities”, used to transform the archaeological information into mathematical probability distributions, may bias the results (Steier and Rom 2000). A general technique for guarding against such a bias is “sensitivity analysis”, in which a range of possible prior probabilities is tested. Only results that prove robust in this analysis should be used. We demonstrate the impact of this method for an assumed, yet realistic case of stratigraphically ordered samples from the Hallstatt period, i.e. the Early Iron Age in Central Europe.

Type
II. Getting More from the Data
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 43 , Issue 2A: Proceedings of the 17th International Radiocarbon Conference (Part 1 of 3) , 2001 , pp. 373 - 380
Copyright
Copyright © The Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Bayes, T. 1763. An Essay towards solving a Problem in the Doctrine of Chances. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 53:370–418. A Postscript and a LaTeχ source file version of this paper are available at URL http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/maths/histstat/essay.ps, and http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/maths/histstat/essay.htm, respectively.Google Scholar
Berger, JO. 1980. Statistical decision theory. New York: Springer-Verlag. 425 p.Google Scholar
Berger, JO. 1994. An overview of robust Bayesian analysis. Test 3:5–124.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 1999. An introduction to the use of Bayesian statistics in the interpretation of radiocarbon dates. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Frontiers in Accelerator Mass Spectrometry. 6–8 January 1999. National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba. National Museum of Japanese History, Sakura. Japan: p 151–60.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2000a. Comment on ‘The use of Bayesian statistics for 14C dates of chronologically ordered samples: a critical analysis’. Radiocarbon 42(2): 199–202.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2000b. OxCal Program v3.5 Manual. URL: http://www.rlaha.ox.ac.uk/orau.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2001. Development of the radiocarbon calibration program OxCal. Radiocarbon. This issue.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C, van der Plicht, J, Weninger, B. 2001. “Wiggle-matching” radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon. This issue.Google Scholar
Buck, CE, Cavanagh, WG, Litton, CD. 1996. Bayesian approach to interpreting archaeological data. Chichester, New York, Brisbane, Toronto, Tokyo, Singapore: John Wiley & Sons. 382 p.Google Scholar
Jeffreys, H. 1961. Theory of probability. 3rd edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 447 p.Google Scholar
Malakoff, D. 1999. Bayes offers a ‘new’ way to make sense of numbers. Science 286:1460–4.Google Scholar
Steier, P, Rom, W. 2000. The use of Bayesian statistics for 14C dates of chronologically ordered samples: a critical analysis. Radiocarbon 42(2):183–98.Google Scholar
Stuiver, M, Reimer, PJ, Bard, E, Beck, JW, Burr, GS, Hughen, K, Kromer, B, McCormac, G, van der Plicht, J, Spurk, M. 1998. INTCAL98 radiocarbon age calibration, 24,000-0 cal BP. Radiocarbon 40(3):1041–83.Google Scholar
Yang, R, Berger, JO. 1997. A catalog of noninformative priors. Institute of Statistics and Decision Sciences: Working Paper Series. URL: http://ftp.isds.duke.edu/WorkingPapers/97-42.html. Accessed 18 October 2000.Google Scholar