Dissecting and Interpreting a Three-Dimensional Ground-Penetrating Radar Dataset: An Example from Northern Australia

Abstract

A robust 3-D GPR dataset provides interpreters with a variety of methods for extracting important information at buried archaeological sites. An iterative approach that uses reflection profile analysis, amplitude slice-mapping, and often both in conjunction is often necessary as neither method by itself is sufficient. In northern Australia, two constructed mounds contain a number of cultural and geological horizons and features, which can be imaged with GPR. The reflection profiles display the modified ground surface prior to mound construction and some initial construction layers. On the pre-mound surface, amplitude maps of reflective layers that were built-up on the ground surface indicate that they were constructed in an intentional manner. Those surfaces were later covered by sand to produce mounds used for human burial. Human internments in the mound can only be seen in reflection profiles, but once discovered, the profiles can be re-sliced to produce high definition amplitude images of these remains. No one method of analysis can provide an overall interpretation of these complex internal mound features. When the methods are varied, depending on the results of one method, a detailed and varied analysis of certain aspects of the mounds’ internal features are visible, leading to the generation of a number of hypotheses about how this area of northern Australia was used in the past. The 3-D data from GPR shows that this area was an important location on the landscape in the past, and was modified by the construction of a monumental mound, which was then used for human burials, and more recently, the construction of what was likely a ritual enclosure.

Geophysical Prospecting of the Coptic Monastery of Apa Moses Using GPR and Magnetic Techniques: A Case Study, Abydos, Sohag, Egypt

“…The cavern system is not entirely hollow; in some places, they are filled with materials having characteristics distinct from those of the host rock. The cavern system has varying depths between 0 and 5.2 m. The GPR method has continued to advance, enabling researchers in a variety of fields to obtain high-resolution images of subsurface objectives, including those in geology and civil engineering [23][24][25], management and conservation of the cultural heritage [26], and archaeology [27][28][29], in examining frescoes, decorations, and columns [23,[30][31][32], and in describing ground conditions in urban areas [33].…”

Three-Dimensional Quantitative Recognition of Filler Materials Ahead of a Tunnel Face via Time-Energy Density Analysis of Wavelet Transforms

“…GPR has been employed in the advanced geological prediction and detection of tunnels [35,36]. From research literature and data, we determine that the detection personnel generally process the GPR signals by using the algorithms of static correction, gain, offset, and filtering included in the GPR software and then analyzed the amplitude, phase, and frequency changes in the GPR profile to infer and explain unfavorable geological bodies [37][38][39]. However, the analysis software in GPR generally uses Fourier theory that has no time-frequency localized analysis capability.…”

Integration of 2D/3D ground penetrating radar and electrical resistivity tomography surveys as enhanced imaging of archaeological ruins: A case study in San El‐Hager (Tanis) site, northeastern Nile Delta, Egypt

“…The geophysical techniques are used as nondestructive as well as fast methods in archaeology to locate, and characterize the subsurface features by measuring its physical properties, such as resistivity and permittivity responses as a function of time and space domains. Ground penetrating radar (GPR), for example, has wide applications in archaeological prospection, since it is able to produce reliable 2D/3D high-resolution images for the shallow subsurface within depths ranges from a few centimetres to tens of metres (Conyers, 2012(Conyers, , 2013Conyers et al, 2019;Verdonck, 2016;Verdonck et al, 2013;Waters, 1992). Moreover, the 2D/3D electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) has become more important for imagining and mapping complex geological and archaeological structures at various depths (Barker, 1981;Bernardes et al, 2017;Clark, 1990;Cozzolino et al, 2012;Dabas et al, 2000;Dahlin, 2001;Gemail, 2015;Gemail et al, 2004Gemail et al, , 2016Griffiths et al, 1990;Griffiths & Barker, 1993;Overmeeren & Ritsema, 1988;Papadopoulos et al, 2007Papadopoulos et al, , 2009.…”