Sensitivity of Radiocarbon Sum Calibration

Sum calibration has become a standard tool for demographic studies, even though the methodology itself is far from uncontroversial. In addition to fundamental methodological criticism, questions are frequently raised about the sample size and data density required to detect large-scale changes in past populations. This article uses a simulation approach to determine the detection probabilities for events of varying intensity and with varying data density. At the same time, the effectiveness of Monte Carlo-based confidence envelopes as a countermeasure against false-positive results is tested. The results show that the detection of such events is not unlikely and that the Monte Carlo method is well suited to separate signal and noise. However, the nature of the events already observed in this way demands further assessment.

[1]  S. Shennan.  Evolutionary Demography and the Population History of the European Early Neolithic , 2009, Human biology.

[2]  K. Becker,et al.  From dates to demography in later prehistoric Ireland? Experimental approaches to the meta-analysis of large 14C data-sets , 2013 .

[3]  Stephen Shennan,et al.  Prehistoric population history: from the Late Glacial to the Late Neolithic in Central and Northern Europe , 2007 .

[4]  M. Macklin,et al.  The development and application of a database of radiocarbon-dated Holocene fluvial deposits in Great Britain , 2006 .

[5]  James Steele,et al.  Neolithic transition in Europe: the radiocarbon record revisited , 2003, Antiquity.

[6]  Mara A. Mulrooney.  An island-wide assessment of the chronology of settlement and land use on Rapa Nui (Easter Island) based on radiocarbon data , 2013 .

[7]  Todd A. Surovell,et al.  Correcting temporal frequency distributions for taphonomic bias , 2009 .

[8]  Rob Marchant,et al.  Neolithic agriculture on the European western frontier: the boom and bust of early farming in Ireland , 2014 .

[9]  A. Martindale,et al.  Radiocarbon test for demographic events in written and oral history , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  Ben Marwick,et al.  Computational Reproducibility in Archaeological Research: Basic Principles and a Case Study of Their Implementation , 2016, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory.

[11]  Stephen Shennan,et al.  Demographic Continuities and Discontinuities in Neolithic Europe: Evidence, Methods and Implications , 2013 .

[12]  Christopher Bronk Ramsey,et al.  Bradshaw and Bayes: Towards a Timetable for the Neolithic , 2007, Cambridge Archaeological Journal.

[13]  J. Steele,et al.  Radiocarbon chronology of the early human occupation of Argentina , 2013 .

[14]  J. Wilmshurst,et al.  The 13th century polynesian colonization of Hawai'i Island , 2011 .

[15]  M. Tallavaara,et al.  Prehistoric population history in eastern Fennoscandia , 2010 .

[16]  Martin Hinz,et al.  Demography and the intensity of cultural activities: an evaluation of Funnel Beaker Societies (4200–2800 cal BC) , 2012 .

[17]  Douglas B. Bamforth,et al.  Radiocarbon calibration curves, summed probability distributions, and early Paleoindian population trends in North America , 2012 .

[18]  Clive Gamble,et al.  The Archaeological and Genetic Foundations of the European Population during the Late Glacial: Implications for ‘Agricultural Thinking’ , 2005, Cambridge Archaeological Journal.

[19]  S. Shennan,et al.  Reconstructing regional population fluctuations in the European Neolithic using radiocarbon dates: a new case-study using an improved method , 2014, Journal of Archaeological Science.

[20]  Todd A. Surovell,et al.  A note on the use of temporal frequency distributions in studies of prehistoric demography , 2007 .

[21]  A. Williams.  The use of summed radiocarbon probability distributions in archaeology: a review of methods , 2012 .

[22]  James Steele,et al.  Radiocarbon dates as data: quantitative strategies for estimating colonization front speeds and event densities , 2010 .

[23]  F. Riede.  Climate and Demography in Early Prehistory: Using Calibrated 14C Dates as Population Proxies , 2009, Human biology.

[24]  R. Dikau,et al.  Holocene river activity: analysing 14C-dated fluvial and colluvial sediments from Germany , 2008 .

[25]  R. Chiverrell,et al.  Cumulative probability functions and their role in evaluating the chronology of geomorphological events during the Holocene , 2010 .

[26]  B. Culleton.  Crude demographic proxy reveals nothing about Paleoindian population , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[27]  John Meadows,et al.  Summed radiocarbon calibrations as a population proxy: a critical evaluation using a realistic simulation approach , 2014 .

[28]  M. Collard,et al.  Paleoindian demography and the extraterrestrial impact hypothesis , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[29]  J. Rick.  Dates as Data: An Examination of the Peruvian Preceramic Radiocarbon Record , 1987, American Antiquity.

[30]  T. McLaughlin,et al.  On Applications of Space–Time Modelling with Open-Source 14C Age Calibration , 2018, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory.

[31]  Philippe Crombé,et al.  14C dates as demographic proxies in Neolithisation models of northwestern Europe: a critical assessment using Belgium and northeast France as a case-study , 2014 .

[32]  Clemens Schmid,et al.  oxcAAR: Interface to 'OxCal' Radiocarbon Calibration , 2018 .

[33]  N. Bleicher.  Summed radiocarbon probability density functions cannot prove solar forcing of Central European lake-level changes , 2013 .

[34]  J. Mabry,et al.  Temporal frequency distributions of alluvium in the American Southwest: taphonomic, paleohydraulic, and demographic implications , 2011 .

[35]  Tim Kerig,et al.  Regional population collapse followed initial agriculture booms in mid-Holocene Europe , 2013, Nature Communications.

[36]  Todd A. Surovell,et al.  A continuous climatic impact on Holocene human population in the Rocky Mountains , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.