4.2 Article

A Bayesian central equivalent dose model for optically stimulated luminescence dating

Journal

QUATERNARY GEOCHRONOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue -, Pages 62-70

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.quageo.2015.04.001

Keywords

Optically stimulated luminescence; Chronometric dating; Bayesian analysis

Funding

  1. french Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) project Chronomodel [ANR 11 MONU 007 - 2011-2015]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, we propose and implement a Bayesian model to estimate a central equivalent dose from a set of luminescence measurements. This model is based on assumptions similar to the ones used in the standard statistical pipeline (typically implemented in the Analyst software followed by a subsequent central equivalent dose analysis) but tackles some of its main limitations. More specifically, it consists of a three-stage hierarchical model that has two main advantages over the standard approach: first, it avoids the introduction of auxiliary variables (typically mean and variance), at each step of the inference process, which are likely to fail to characterise the distributions of interest; second, it ensures a homogeneous and consistent inference with respect to the overall model and data. As a Bayesian model, our model requires the specification of prior distributions; we discuss such informative and non-informative distributions and check the relevance of our choices on synthetic data. Then, we use data derived from Single Aliquot and Regenerative (SAR) dose measurements performed on single grains from laboratory-bleached and dosed samples. The results show that our Bayesian approach offers a promising alternative to the standard one. Finally, we conclude by stressing that, relying on a Bayesian hierarchical model, our approach could be modified to incorporate additional information (e.g. stratigraphic constraints) that is difficult to formalise properly with the existing approaches. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available