Comparing and matching archaeological excavation data for integration in ontologies
1 like1,250 views
The document discusses the challenges of integrating and comparing archaeological excavation data due to varied vocabularies, methodologies, and isolated databases. It emphasizes the need for a common conceptual reference model and introduces CRMarchaeo, an extension of CIDOC CRM, to facilitate information exchange and standardization in archaeological terminology. Additionally, the document highlights the difficulties in defining terms and guidelines within current archaeological excavation practices.
Comparing and matching archaeological excavation data for integration in ontologies
- 1. Comparing and matching archaeological excavation data for integration in ontologies ANJA MASUR and KEITH MAY
- 2. Ideal world scenario @ Mr. Hiebel: Can you send me the documentation on this early Hallstatt excavations, please? I need some information for my comparative studies! @Mr. May No problem, we have it in the database already. In which format do you need it? I will send you a link for the download! Mr. May Mr. Hiebel
- 3. Ideal world scenario @ Mr. Hiebel: Can you send me the documentation on this early Hallstatt excavations, please? I need some information for my comparative studies! @Mr. May No problem, we have it in the database already. In which format do you need it? I will send you a link for the download! Mr. May Mr. Hiebel Mr. May can integrate and compare the data easily and without loss of content!
- 4. Ideal world scenario @ Mr. Hiebel: Can you send me the documentation on this early Hallstatt excavations, please? I need some information for my comparative studies! @Mr. May No problem, we have it in the database already. In which format do you need it? I will send you a link for the download! Mr. May Mr. Hiebel Mr. May can integrate and compare the data easily and without loss of content! STOP! What part of this scenario is unrealistic?
- 5. 1. Problem The Archaeological Archipelagos • different vocabularies, different methodologies, different languages •independent and isolated databases
- 6. ”Every archaeological site is itself a document. It can be read by a skilled excavator, but it is destroyed by the very process which enables us to read it. Unlike the study of an ancient document, the study of a site by excavation is an unrepeatable experiment.” (Barker 1982: 12)
- 8. Outline 1.Method 2.Again….Problems 3.Approach 4.Conclusion/Challenges
- 9. 2. ARIADNE •Under the direction of ICS FORTH and Martin Doerr in Greece •Task: extension of the CIDOC CRM for archaeological demands o CIDOC CRM as ontology used the most in the archaeological world o provides definitions and formal structure for CH concepts o enables information exchange
- 10. Documentation •Different excavation methods bring differing documentation •Comparison of different documentation sheets •Excavation sheet are abstraction of reality (based on ontologies)
- 11. Bavaria
- 12. EH
- 13. Israel
- 14. Documentation Defined key concepts: site find area Stratigra- phic unit Phys. relationships Strat. relationships samples within within within within Aggregation relationships
- 15. Excavation Methodology • stratigraphic • in spits / arbitrary • mix Stratigraphic Unit
- 16. Excavation Methodology In spits:
- 17. context Locus Excavation Unit Lot Level Stratum Behälter (Troy) (Basket) Semantics One language - one meaning – different terms Stratigra- phic Unit
- 18. Stratigraphic Unit Unité stratigraphique Stratigrafiskt objekt Stratigraphische Einheit stratigrafske enote unità stratigrafica Semantics Different languages - same meaning – different terms context Locus Excavation Unit Lot Level Stratum Behälter (Troy) (Basket)
- 19. Ideal world scenario I need some information for my comparative studies! Mr. May Mr. Hiebel Semantic gap -Different languages - Different methodologies -Different concepts Common archaeological understanding (Conceptual Reference Model) Mr. Hiebel knows how to transfer the data to the model Mr. May knows how to interpret the data mapped to the common model
- 20. CRMarchaeo – an extension of CIDOC CRM A1 Excavation Process Unit A2 Stratigraphic Unit A Stratigraphic Unit is a connected portion of terrain or other solid structure on, in, or under the surface of earth or seafloor with some homogeneity of structure or substance. It is completely bounded by surfaces or discontinuities in substance or structure with respect to other portions of the terrain or surfaces of objects/finds. It may contain physical objects. Furthermore is is regarded as product of the same genesis event or process. The intentional activity of excavating in units defined by the archaeological methodology chosen as appropriate regarding the research question. The A1 EPU may follow an A2 SU or an arbitrary volume of matter like a basket or spit. Even if the A1 follows an A2 and completely removes it they should be documented separately.
- 21. AP1 produced AP5 cut AP3 excavated A1 Excavation Process Unit P33 used specific technique SP2 Phenomenal Place SP6 Declarative Place Q11 approximates A2 Stratigraphic Unit P13 destroyed A9 Constellation of Matter S11 Amount of Matter P17 was motivated by E73 Information Object P21 had general purpose E55 Type E55 Type E7 Activity AP6 occupied Class of CIDOC CRM Other extensions Class of CRMarchaeo
- 22. Conclusions: •Although there exist different excavation methods and documentation with different terminology they share common conceptual frameworks and semantic relationships which allow an implementation in ontologies.
- 23. Challenges/Gaps •Elaborating of CRMarchaeo •Some poblems with archaeological excavation guidelines : rarely give definitions of terms (what is a SU?) don´t describe systems which are used/that can be used
- 24. ARIADNE is a project funded by the European Commission under the Community’s Seventh Framework Programme, contract no. FP7- INFRASTRUCTURES-2012-1-313193. The views and opinions expressed in this presentation are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission.