geosciences Review Dreaming of Perfect Data: Characterizing Noise in Archaeo-Geophysical Measurements Armin Schmidt 1,* , Michel Dabas 2 and Apostolos Sarris 3 1 GeodataWIZ, 53424 Remagen, Germany 2 AOROC, UMR 8546, CNRS-PSL, École Normale Supérieure, 75005 Paris, France;
[email protected] 3 Department of History and Archaeology, University of Cyprus, Nicosia 1095, Cyprus;
[email protected] * Correspondence:
[email protected] Received: 30 June 2020; Accepted: 18 September 2020; Published: 23 September 2020 Abstract: For the interpretation of archaeological geophysical data as archaeological features, it is essential that the recorded anomalies can be clearly delineated and analyzed, and therefore, care has been taken to obtain the best possible data. However, as with all measurements, data are degraded by unwanted components, or noise. This review clarifies the terminology, discusses the four major sources of noise (instrument, use of instrument, external, soil), and demonstrates how it can be characterized using geostatistical and wavenumber methods. It is important to recognize that even with improved instruments, some noise sources, like soil noise, may persist and that degraded data may be the result of unexpected sources, for example, global positioning system synchronization problems. Suggestions for the evaluation and recording of noise levels are provided to allow estimation of the limit of detection for archaeological geophysical anomalies. Keywords: geophysics; detectability; noise; anomaly; contrast; soil; archaeology; COST Action SAGA (CA17131) 1. Introduction The ultimate aim of an archaeological geophysical survey is to detect and investigate features buried in the ground. However, such measurements contain many additional unwanted components that become embedded in the data, originating from the use of the instruments, the soil conditions, or from external disturbances.