Ergänzungsmaterial zu: Blades, bladelets or blade(let)s? Investigating early Upper Palaeolithic technology and taxonomical considerations / Klingen, Lamellen oder beides? Untersuchungen zur früh-jungpaläolithischen Technologie und taxonomische Überlegungen
<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|> You are a research archivist expert in dataset metadata. Answer the question truthfully.  <|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|> Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'The early Upper Palaeolithic marks a technological turning point in Western Eurasia, evidenced by the increased spread of bladelet production. The two main technocomplexes, the Aurignacian and the Ahmarian, have long histories of research and have always formed part of the debate on the Homo sapiens dispersal into Europe, with changing interpretations. A large aspect of the debate surrounding the recognition of different technocomplexes revolves around the question of whether or not bladelet production is independent of blade production. Here we present a first-hand analysis of three early Upper Palaeolithic assemblages in Europe and the Levant, conventionally attributed to different technocomplexes: Al-Ansab 1, Românești-Dumbrăvița I GH3, Grotta di Fumane A1-A2. Results show that the lithic technologies at the three sites display almos' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|> {"Answer" : ["Ahmarian","Aurignacian","dispersal","Europe","Homo sapiens","Levant","lithic artefact"]} <|eot_id|>
 Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'The early Upper Palaeolithic marks a technological turning point in Western Eurasia, evidenced by the increased spread of bladelet production. The two main technocomplexes, the Aurignacian and the Ahmarian, have long histories of research and have always formed part of the debate on the Homo sapiens dispersal into Europe, with changing interpretations. A large aspect of the debate surrounding the recognition of different technocomplexes revolves around the question of whether or not bladelet production is independent of blade production. Here we present a first-hand analysis of three early Upper Palaeolithic assemblages in Europe and the Levant, conventionally attributed to different technocomplexes: Al-Ansab 1, Românești-Dumbrăvița I GH3, Grotta di Fumane A1-A2. Results show that the lithic technologies at the three sites display almos' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.
The early Upper Palaeolithic marks a technological turning point in Western Eurasia, evidenced by the increased spread of bladelet production. The two main technocomplexes, the Aurignacian and the Ahmarian, have long histories of research and have always formed part of the debate on the Homo sapiens dispersal into Europe, with changing interpretations. A large aspect of the debate surrounding the recognition of different technocomplexes revolves around the question of whether or not bladelet production is independent of blade production. Here we present a first-hand analysis of three early Upper Palaeolithic assemblages in Europe and the Levant, conventionally attributed to different technocomplexes: Al-Ansab 1, Românești-Dumbrăvița I GH3, Grotta di Fumane A1-A2. Results show that the lithic technologies at the three sites display almos
Ahmarian; Aurignacian; dispersal; Europe; Homo sapiens; Levant; lithic artefact