Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-zsp5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T02:42:36.810Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New Radiocarbon Calibration Software

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

Martin Jones and
Geoff Nicholls
Martin Jones
Affiliation:
Centre for Archaeological Research, Auckland University, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand. Email: martin@analytic.co.nz.
Geoff Nicholls
Affiliation:
Centre for Archaeological Research, Auckland University, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand. Email: martin@analytic.co.nz.
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.

We have developed a software utility, “DateLab”, for conventional radiocarbon age (CRA) calibration and Bayesian analysis of CRAs. The current version has a smaller range of applicability than other similar utilities such as Bcal, Oxcal, and Mexcal. However, it enables analysis of some common types of CRA datesets. The main advantages of DateLab are its high quality sampling algorithm, the possibility of carrying out model comparison and hypothesis testing in a straightforward way, and the unbiased character of the summary statistics on which the analysis depends.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 44 , Issue 3 , 2002, pp. 663 - 674
Copyright
Copyright © The Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Anderson, A, Ritchie, N. 1986. Pavements, Pounamu and Ti: the Dart Bridge site in western Otago, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology 8:115–41.Google Scholar
Anderson, A, Smith, I, Higham, T. 1996. Radiocarbon chronology. In: Anderson, A, Smith, I, Allingham, B, editors. Shag river mouth: the archaeology of an early Southern Maori village. The Australian National University, Canberra: ANH Publications, RSPAS. p 61–9.Google Scholar
Buck, CE, Cavanagh, WG, Litton, CD. 1996. The Bayesian approach to interpreting archaeological data. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Buck, CE, Christen, JA, James, GN. 1999. BCal: an on-line Bayesian radiocarbon calibration tool. Internet Archaeology 7. <http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue7/buck/>Google Scholar
Buck, CE, Christen, JA, Kenworthy, JB, Litton, CD. 1994. Estimating the duration of archaeological activity using 14C determinations. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 13:229–40.Google Scholar
Buck, CE, Kenworthy, JB, Litton, CD, Smith, AFM. 1991. Combining archaeological and radiocarbon information: a Bayesian approach to calibration. Antiquity 65: 808–21.Google Scholar
Buck, CE, Litton, CD, Smith, AFM. 1992. Calibration of radiocarbon results pertaining to related archaeological events. Journal of Archaeological Science 19:497–512.Google Scholar
Christen, JA. 1994a. Bayesian interpretation of 14C results. PhD thesis. University of Nottingham, Nottingham, England.Google Scholar
Christen, JA. 1994b. Summarizing a set of radiocarbon determinations: a robust approach. Applied Statistics 43:489–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christen, JA, Buck, CE. 1998. Sample selection in radiocarbon dating. Applied Statistics 47:543–57.Google Scholar
Christen, JA, Clymo, RS, Litton, CD. 1995. A Bayesian approach to the use of 14C dates in the estimation of the age of peat. Radiocarbon 37(2):431–42.Google Scholar
Christen, JA, Litton, CD. 1995. A Bayesian approach to wiggle-matching. Journal of Archaeological Science 22:719–25.Google Scholar
Jones, MD, Nicholls, GK. 2001. Reservoir offset models for radiocarbon calibration. Radiocarbon 43(1):119–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Litton, CD, Leese, MN. 1991. Some statistical problems arising in radiocarbon calibration. In: Lockyear, K, Rahtz, SPQ, editors. Computer applications and quantitative methods in archaeology 1990. Oxford: Tempus Reparatum. p 101–9.Google Scholar
Meng, X-L, Wong, WH. 1996. Simulating ratios of normalising constants via a simple identity: a theoretical exploration. Statistica Sinica 6:831–60.Google Scholar
Naylor, JC, Smith, AFM. 1988. An archaeological inference problem. Journal of the American Statistical Association 83:588–95.Google Scholar
Nicholls, GK, Jones, MD. 1998. Radiocarbon dating with temporal order constraints. Technical report. Mathematics Department, Auckland University, New Zealand. No. 407 <http://www.math.auckland.ac.nz/≃nicholls>Google Scholar
Nicholls, GK, Jones, MD. 2001. Radiocarbon dating with temporal order constraints. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, series C, 50(4):503–21.Google Scholar
Raftery, AE. 1996. Markov chain Monte Carlo in practice. Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Ramsey, CB. 1995. Radiocarbon calibration and analysis of stratigraphy: the OxCal program. Radiocarbon 37(2):425–30.Google Scholar
Simmons, D. 1973. Radiocarbon dates from the Dart Valley region. New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter 16:175.Google Scholar
Stuiver, M, Reimer, PJ. 1993. Extended 14C database and revised CALIB radiocarbon calibration program. Radiocarbon 35(1):215–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuiver, M, Reimer, PJ, Bard, E, Beck, JW, Burr, GS, Hughen, KA, Kromer, B, McCormac, FG, van der Plicht, J, Spurk, M. 1998. INTCAL98 radiocarbon age calibration, 24,000–0 cal B P. Radiocarbon 40(3): 1041–83.Google Scholar
Zeidler, JA, Buck, CE, Litton, CD. 1998. The integration of archaeological phase information and radiocarbon results from the Jama River Valley, Ecuador: a Bayesian approach. Latin American Antiquity 9:135–59.Google Scholar