Why? The technology is pretty new.
replyIt would not have been realistic to have PhD students manually comb through thousands of square kilometers of LIDAR data, and crossreference everything with existing sites; LLMs have turned this into low-hanging fruit.
Can't expect every single scientific field to immediately use any new technology to its full potential, and it makes you sound like a prick, too.
The world has general access to AI since years. Imagine you spend your life as archeologist, then when a new technology comes along that could revolutionize your field, you ignore it. Using AI to classify/search for locations is such a no brainer, that asking why it is not the norm, is a valid question. Humans should review the findings, but the boring work should probably be done by the machines.
replyperfectly valid question; and i think we shall explain further why human intelligence have such a slop
replyAre you under the impression that this finding will revolutionize the field of archeology?
replyExcusing a scientific field not embracing paradigm-shifting new developments isn't even an argument.
replyThe real answer is financial incentives tied to publishing of research - something that academics in gatekept fields see as the thin edge of the wedge in exposing a utility/ROI gap for legacy practitioners.
Enjoy calling other people failures much? https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352409X2...
reply