Redefining Archaeological Research: Digital Tools, Challenges, and Integration in Advancing Methods
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper explores the diverse array of digital tools utilized for data acquisition in archaeology. This abstract outlines the various categories of digital tools commonly employed, including geographic information systems (GISs), global positioning systems (GPSs), remote sensing technologies, 3D scanning and photogrammetry, drones and aerial photography, as well as mobile applications and digital recording systems. Each category is elucidated with examples of their application in archaeological research, emphasizing their roles in site mapping, spatial data collection, artefact documentation, and landscape analysis. Furthermore, it discusses the advancements, challenges, and best practices associated with the integration of digital tools into archaeological fieldwork. It also highlights the potential for future developments in digital technologies to enhance data acquisition capabilities further, ultimately contributing to a deeper understanding of human history and cultural heritage.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Archaeological Research and Protection · Image Processing and 3D Reconstruction · 3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Geoinformatics and Surveying Engineering, International Hellenic University, 62124 Serres, Greece
School of Spatial Planning and Development, Laboratory of Geoinformatics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece
Funding
European Union—NextGenerationEU
References (92)
Show source-provided references
1. Digital Tools for Data Acquisition and Heritage Management in Archaeology and Their Impact on Archaeological Practices10.3390/heritage7010005 ↗
2. In Archaeology in the Digital Era Volume II
3. GPR Impedance Inversion for Imaging and Characterization of Buried Archaeological Remains: A Case Study at Mudu City Cite in Suzhou, China10.1016/j.jappgeo.2017.12.002 ↗
4. Garstki, K. (2020). Digital Innovations in European Archaeology, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108881425 ↗
5. Pechunov, N., and Taipova, E. (2022, January 10–12). Digital tools in a clil context of teaching english to archaeology students. Proceedings of the ADVED 2022- 8th International Conference on Advances in Education, Istanbul, Turkey.10.47696/adved.202219 ↗
6. Perfetti, L., Fassi, F., and Rossi, C. (2020). Low-Cost Digital Tools for Archaeology, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-33323-2_12 ↗
7. Digital Data and Tools in Archaeology: The ROCEEH Out of Africa Database (ROAD)10.1553/giscience2018_02_s3 ↗
8. Geographic Information Systems in Archaeology: A Systematic Review
9. Mobilizing Archaeologists: Increasing the Quantity and Quality of Data Collected in the Field with Mobile Technology10.7183/2326-3768.2.1.13 ↗
10. Integrated RS, GIS and GPS approaches to archaeological prospecting in the Hexi Corridor, NW China: A case study of the royal road to ancient Dunhuang10.1016/j.jas.2014.07.009 ↗
11. A GIS-Based Digital Documentation Protocol for High-Resolution Documentation of Paleolithic Sites10.1007/s41982-023-00148-w ↗
12. Dell’Unto, N., and Landeschi, G. (2022). Archaeological 3D GIS, Routledge.10.4324/9781003034131 ↗
13. Siart, C., Forbriger, M., and Bubenzer, O. (2018). Spatial Analysis in Archaeology: Moving into New Territories. Digital Geoarchaeology: New Techniques for Interdisciplinary Human-Environmental Research, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-319-25316-9 ↗
14. Howland, M.D., Liss, B., Najjar, M., and Levy, T.E. (2015). GIS-based mapping of archaeological sites with low-altitude aerial photography and structure from Motion: A case study from Southern Jordan. 2015 Digital Heritage, IEEE.10.1109/DigitalHeritage.2015.7413842 ↗
15. Luo, L., Wang, X., Lasaponara, R., Xiang, B., Zhen, J., Zhu, L., Yang, R., Liu, D., and Liu, C. (2018). Auto-Extraction of Linear Archaeological Traces of Tuntian Irrigation Canals in Miran Site (China) from Gaofen-1 Satellite Imagery. Remote Sens., 10.10.20944/preprints201804.0057.v1 ↗
16. Groenhuijzen, M.R., and Verhagen, P. (2015). Exploring the dynamics of transport in the Dutch limes. eTopoi J. Anc. Stud., 4, Available online: https://www.topoi.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/eTopoi_Sp4_Verhagen_etal.pdf.
17. Katsamudanga, S. (2022). GIS Applications in Southern African Archaeology, Oxford University Press.10.1093/acrefore/9780190277734.013.1136 ↗
18. Buławka, N., and Chyla, J. (2020). Mobile GIS—Current Possibilities, Future Needs. Position Paper. Digital Archaeologies, Material Worlds (Past and Present), Proceedings of the 45rd Annual Conference on Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, Atlanta, GA, USA, 14–16 March 2017, Tübingen University Press.
19. Use of the sensors of a latest generation mobile phone for the three-dimensional reconstruction of an archaeological monument: The survey of the Intihuatana stone in Machu Picchu (Peru’)10.1088/1757-899X/949/1/012106 ↗
20. Marín-Buzón, C., Pérez-Romero, A., López-Castro, J.L., Jerbania, I.B., and Manzano-Agugliaro, F. (2021). Photogrammetry as a New Scientific Tool in Archaeology: Worldwide Research Trends. Sustainability, 13.10.3390/su13095319 ↗
21. Solving the Grid-to-Ground Problem when Using High Precision GNSS in Archaeological Mapping10.7183/2326-3768.2.2.138 ↗
22. Archaeological Survey Supported by Mobile GIS: Low-Budget Strategies at the Hualfín Valley (Catamarca, Argentina)10.1017/aap.2022.2 ↗
23. Topouzi, S., Tripolitsiotis, A., Sarris, A., and Mertikas, S. (2001). Errors & Inaccuracies in Repositioning of Archaeological Sites. Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, Proceedings of the 29th Conference, Gotland, Sweden, 25–29 April 2001, Archaeopress.
24. Late Prehistory of the Lower Galilee: Multi-Faceted Investigations of Wadi el-Ashert10.1086/711381 ↗
25. Restoration workflows by means of photogrammetry: The case study of pashas bridge10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-M-2-2023-1543-2023 ↗
26. Schowengerdt, R.A. (2006). Remote Sensing: Models and Methods for Image Processing, Elsevier Science. Available online: https://books.google.gr/books?id=KQXNaDH0X-IC.
27. Gilbert, A.S. (2017). Remote Sensing in Archaeology. Encyclopedia of Geoarchaeology, Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-4409-0 ↗
28. Airborne and spaceborne remote sensing for archaeological and cultural heritage applications: A review of the century (1907–2017)10.1016/j.rse.2019.111280 ↗
29. Lasaponara, R., and Masini, N. (2012). Remote Sensing in Archaeology: From Visual Data Interpretation to Digital Data Manipulation. Satellite Remote Sensing: A New Tool for Archaeology, Springer.10.1007/978-90-481-8801-7 ↗
30. Impact of urban sprawl to cultural heritage monuments: The case study of Paphos area in Cyprus10.1016/j.culher.2014.12.006 ↗
31. Aerial survey for archaeology10.1046/j.0031-868X.2003.00023.x ↗
32. Verhoeven, G., and Sevara, C. (2016). Trying to Break New Ground in Aerial Archaeology. Remote Sens., 8.10.3390/rs8110918 ↗
33. Gaci, S., Hachay, O., and Nicolis, O. (2021). 19—Wavelet-based fractal and multifractal analysis for detecting mineral deposits using multispectral images taken by drones. Methods and Applications in Petroleum and Mineral Exploration and Engineering Geology, Elsevier.
34. Remote-sensing hyperspectral imaging for applications in archaeological areas: Non-invasive investigations on wall paintings and on mural inscriptions in the Pompeii site10.1016/j.microc.2020.105082 ↗
35. New ways to extract archaeological information from hyperspectral pixels10.1016/j.jas.2014.08.023 ↗
36. Wiseman, J., and El-Baz, F. (2007). Spaceborne and Airborne Radar at Angkor: Introducing New Technology to the Ancient Site. Remote Sensing in Archaeology, Springer.10.1007/0-387-44455-6 ↗
37. Balz, T., Caspari, G., Fu, B., and Liao, M. (2016). Discernibility of Burial Mounds in High-Resolution X-Band SAR Images for Archaeological Prospections in the Altai Mountains. Remote Sens., 8.10.3390/rs8100817 ↗
38. Exploring archaeological landscapes using drone-acquired lidar: Case studies from Hawai’i, Colorado, and New Hampshire, USA
39. Using Airborne LiDAR Survey to Explore Historic-Era Archaeo-logical Landscapes of Montserrat in the Eastern Caribbean10.1179/2042458215Y.0000000016 ↗
40. Multispectral and multiscale remote sensing data for archaeological prospecting in an alpine alluvial plain10.1016/S1296-2074(00)00155-2 ↗
41. Free and Low-Cost Aerial Remote Sensing in Archaeology10.1017/aap.2023.3 ↗
42. An archaeology of landscapes: Perspectives and directions10.1023/A:1016621326415 ↗
43. Wiseman, J., and El-Baz, F. (2007). Putting Us on the Map: Remote Sensing Investigation of the Ancient Maya Landscape. Remote Sensing in Archaeology, Springer.10.1007/0-387-44455-6 ↗
44. A predictive model of archaeological potential: An example from northwestern Belize10.1016/j.apgeog.2009.01.001 ↗
45. Regional patterns, local techniques. Remote sensing and archaeology at prehispanic site of San Isidro, El Salvador
46. Web-based visualization for 3D data in archaeology: The ADS 3D viewer
47. 3D Documentation and Visualization of Cultural Heritage Buildings through the Application of Geospatial Technologies10.3390/heritage5040146 ↗
48. Integration of 3D models and diagnostic analyses through a conservation-oriented information system10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W5-497-2017 ↗
49. Advanced damage detection techniques in historical buildings using digital photogrammetry and 3D surface anlysis10.1016/j.culher.2018.09.014 ↗
50. Advanced Digitization Methods for the Protection and Dissemination of Cultural Heritage towards Digital transformation: The Archaeological Museum of Delphi10.1016/j.procir.2023.06.181 ↗
51. Assisted navigation and natural interaction for virtual archaeological heritage. implementation of an attractor-based approach using a game engine
52. Accessing interactively the spatio-temporal data-model of an archaeological site through its 3D virtual reconstruction
53. Digital survey: How it can change the way we perceive and understand heritage sites
54. Recasting a Viking warrior woman from Ribe: 3D digital image reconstruction compared
55. Strategy for HBIM implementation using high-resolution 3D architectural documentation based on laser scanning and photogrammetry of the José de Alencar theatre
56. 3D models of lithic artefacts: A test on their efficacy
57. Building a Mycenaean chamber tomb catalogue from terrestrial laser scan data
58. UAV and RPV systems for photogrammetric surveys in archaelogical areas: Two tests in the Piedmont region (Italy)10.1016/j.jas.2010.10.022 ↗
59. Multi-sensor drone survey of ancestral agricultural landscapes at Picuris Pueblo, New Mexico10.1016/j.jas.2023.105837 ↗
60. Drones over Mediterranean landscapes. The potential of small UAV’s (drones) for site detection and heritage management in archaeological survey projects: A case study from Le Pianelle in the Tappino Valley, Molise (Italy)10.1016/j.culher.2016.06.006 ↗
61. Fiz, J.I., Martín, P.M., Cuesta, R., Subías, E., Codina, D., and Cartes, A. (2022). Examples and Results of Aerial Photogrammetry in Archeology with UAV: Geometric Documentation, High Resolution Multispectral Analysis, Models and 3D Printing. Drones, 6.10.3390/drones6030059 ↗
62. Drones in vegetable crops: A systematic literature review10.1016/j.atech.2024.100396 ↗
63. Assessing the potential of multispectral and thermal UAV imagery from archaeological sites. A case study from the Iron Age hillfort of Villasviejas del Tamuja (Cáceres, Spain)
64. Quantitative Analysis of Two Low-Cost Aerial Photography Platforms: A Case Study of the Site of Zagora, Andros, Greece10.1080/00934690.2016.1208551 ↗
65. Developing an interoperable cloud-based visualization workflow for 3D archaeological heritage data: The Palenque 3D Archaeological Atlas
66. Archaeology of Archaeology at Heloros: Re-Interpreting the Urban Layout of a Complex Greek Settlement in Sicily Using Prox-imal Sensing and Data Fusion
67. A brave new world for archaeological survey: Automated machine learning-based potsherd detection using high-resolution drone imagery10.1016/j.jas.2019.105013 ↗
68. Archaeological crop marks detection through drone multispectral remote sensing and vegetation indices: A new approach tested on the Italian pre-Roman city of Veii
69. Heritage at risk: Digital preservation of traditional cultural heritage (TCH) in Sri Lanka10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-M-2-2023-1197-2023 ↗
70. Application of mobile digital recording and GIS analysis of archaeological surface survey finds in the MapFarm project
71. FAIRer Data through Digital Recording: The FAIMS Mobile Experience
72. FAIMS Mobile: Flexible, open-source software for field research10.1016/j.softx.2017.12.006 ↗
73. Surveying the Neolithic farmers in Aegean Thrace with digital technologies
74. Argyrou, A., and Agapiou, A. (2022). A Review of Artificial Intelligence and Remote Sensing for Archaeological Research. Remote Sens., 14.10.3390/rs14236000 ↗
75. Küçükdemirci, M., and Sarris, A. (2022). GPR Data Processing and Interpretation Based on Artificial Intelligence Approaches: Future Perspectives for Archaeological Prospection. Remote Sens., 14.10.3390/rs14143377 ↗
76. Venditti, C.P., and Mele, P. (2020). Digital Transformation and Archaeology. Developing Effective Communication Skills in Archaeology, IGI Global.10.4018/978-1-7998-1059-9.ch011 ↗
77. Towards the use of artificial intelligence deep learning networks for detection of archaeological sites10.1088/2051-672X/ac9492 ↗
78. Integrated and interactive 4D system for archaeological stratigraphy10.1007/s12520-022-01667-3 ↗
79. Bridging Digital Approaches and Legacy in Archaeology10.3390/digital2040029 ↗
80. Creating a Software Methodology to Analyze and Preserve Archaeological Legacy Data10.1017/aap.2022.44 ↗
81. Reinhard, A. (2019). Archaeology of Digital Environments: Tools, Methods, and Approaches. [Doctoral Dissertation, University of York].
82. A HBIM pipeline for the conservation of large-scale architectural heritage: The city Walls of Pisa10.1186/s40494-024-01141-4 ↗
83. Bridging the gap: An open-source gis+bim system for archaeological data. the case study of altinum, Italy10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-M-2-2023-491-2023 ↗
84. The Application of Historic Building Information Modelling (HBIM) to Cultural Heritage: A Review10.3390/heritage6100350 ↗
85. Diara, F., and Rinaudo, F. (2021). ARK-BIM: Open-Source Cloud-Based HBIM Platform for Archaeology. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app11188770 ↗
86. Enhancing HBIM-to-VR workflows: Semi-automatic generation of virtual heritage experiences using enriched IFC files
87. The Use and Challenges of Spatial Data in Archaeology10.1017/aap.2022.38 ↗
88. Three-Dimensional Digitization of Archaeological Sites—The Use Case of the Palace of Knossos10.3390/heritage6020050 ↗
89. The Cataloging and Conservation of Digital Survey in Archaeology: A Photogrammetry Protocol in the Context of Digital Data Curation10.3390/heritage6030166 ↗
90. Morgan, C.L. Current Digital Archaeology. Annu. Rev. Anthropol., 2022.10.1146/annurev-anthro-041320-114101 ↗
91. Digital Data and Data Literacy in Archaeology Now and in the New Decade10.1017/aap.2020.55 ↗
92. Digital Archaeological Data in the Wild West: The challenge of practising responsible digital data archiving and access in the United States