(Whose defaults?) Is artificial intelligence reorienting archaeological methods?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.11198v1
• Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 08:08:15 GMT
• Title: (Whose defaults?) Is artificial intelligence reorienting archaeological methods?
• Abstract summary: Generative AI and "vibe coding" are changing how archaeologists carry out computational research.<n>We evaluate whether large language models (LLMs) are narrowing the variety of methods archaeologists use.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Generative AI and the practice of "vibe coding" are changing how archaeologists carry out computational research, but their effects on the discipline's range of methods is still understudied. In this paper, we evaluate whether large language models (LLMs) are narrowing the variety of methods archaeologists use. We first analysed approximately 119,000 archaeology abstracts from Scopus, covering publications from 2010 to 2025. Using a locally run LLM, we identified the computational methods reported in each abstract and organised them into 25 broad categories (L2) and 241 finer clusters (L3). A Bayesian Dirichlet-multinomial model of method composition within sub-disciplines found a small but credible shift in method use after 2023. However, this shift was smaller than the variation already present across the full study period. No individual technique showed a significant change, and overall methodological diversity increased rather than declined. We then ran a controlled experiment to see whether LLMs recommend a narrower set of methods than archaeologists have used in practice. Two different open-weight models were asked to suggest methods for 28 archaeological research problems, with prompts providing three levels of methodological guidance: novice, intermediate, and expert. Recommendation diversity was much lower than in the published literature, particularly without methodological guidance. The models also tended to favour methods that were widely used before 2023, and their recommendations more closely resembled the post-2023 literature. Taken together, these results are consistent with LLMs pushing methodological choice towards convergence, although our study cannot establish a causal effect. They raise a broader question: how can archaeology retain methodological diversity as LLMs become more involved in research?

Related papers

• Parameter Exploration for RLVR via Variational Learning [52.28666546574647]
  Many existing methods control exploration in the action-space, for example, using temperature scaling.<n>Here, we investigate parameter-space exploration, where rollouts are generated by sampling different policies from a posterior that may each explore different rollouts.<n>Experiments show that these approaches consistently improve average downstream performance over standard GRPO at a near-identical FLOPs cost.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-10T16:28:07Z)
• Research Method Usage across Academic Ages in Library and Information Science: An Empirical Study (1990-2023) [7.4287545941586615]
  Academic age shapes career development, influencing research behavior, output volume, and methodological choices.<n>A corpus of 26,677 articles published 1990-2023 in 14 authoritative Library and Information Science journals was compiled.<n>Mid-career scholars exhibit the highest method diversity; late-career scholars the lowest.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-20T03:57:28Z)
• Thinking Like a Scientist? A Structural Study of LLM-Generated Research Methods [4.424680117690851]
  We prompt GPT-5.1, Gemini 3 Pro, and DeepSeek-V3.2 with an LLM-extracted research question from each of 1,000 recent arXiv computer-science papers.<n>Since we provide only the research question, the differences we measure reflect initial suggestions and not how optimal those suggestions are.<n>The strongest imbalance appears in provider choice, with Jensen-Shannon divergence about 3-5x larger than any other taxonomy dimension.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-15T14:53:30Z)
• Part I: Tricks or Traps? A Deep Dive into RL for LLM Reasoning [53.85659415230589]
  This paper systematically reviews widely adoptedReinforcement learning techniques.<n>We present clear guidelines for selecting RL techniques tailored to specific setups.<n>We also reveal that a minimalist combination of two techniques can unlock the learning capability of critic-free policies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-11T17:39:45Z)
• Machine learning applications in archaeological practices: a review [0.0]
  We reviewed 135 articles published between 1997 and 2022.<n> Automatic structure detection and artefact classification were the most represented tasks.<n>We observed, in some cases, poorly defined requirements and caveats of the machine learning methods used.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-07T14:50:05Z)
• Ontology Embedding: A Survey of Methods, Applications and Resources [54.3453925775069]
  Onologies are widely used for representing domain knowledge and meta data.<n> logical reasoning that can directly support are quite limited in learning, approximation and prediction.<n>One straightforward solution is to integrate statistical analysis and machine learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-16T14:49:19Z)
• CausalGym: Benchmarking causal interpretability methods on linguistic tasks [52.61917615039112]
  We use CausalGym to benchmark the ability of interpretability methods to causally affect model behaviour. We study the pythia models (14M--6.9B) and assess the causal efficacy of a wide range of interpretability methods. We find that DAS outperforms the other methods, and so we use it to study the learning trajectory of two difficult linguistic phenomena.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T21:35:56Z)
• Use and Misuse of Machine Learning in Anthropology [0.9786690381850356]
  We will focus on the field of paleoanthropology, which seeks to understand the evolution of the human species based on biological and cultural evidence. The aim of this paper is to provide a brief introduction to some of the ways in which ML has been applied within paleoanthropology. We discuss a series of missteps, errors, and violations of correct protocols of ML methods that appear disconcertingly often within the accumulating body of anthropological literature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-06T20:32:24Z)
• Guided Deep Metric Learning [0.9786690381850356]
  We propose a novel approach to DML that we call Guided Deep Metric Learning. The proposed method is capable of a better manifold generalization and representation to up to 40% improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-04T17:34:11Z)
• A Survey on Deep Semi-supervised Learning [51.26862262550445]
  We first present a taxonomy for deep semi-supervised learning that categorizes existing methods. We then offer a detailed comparison of these methods in terms of the type of losses, contributions, and architecture differences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-28T16:22:58Z)
• There and Back Again: Revisiting Backpropagation Saliency Methods [87.40330595283969]
  Saliency methods seek to explain the predictions of a model by producing an importance map across each input sample. A popular class of such methods is based on backpropagating a signal and analyzing the resulting gradient. We propose a single framework under which several such methods can be unified.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-06T17:58:08Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.