Define the question first
Clarify what the project needs to decide: delineate areas of interest, investigate anomalies, compare evidence with planned excavations or obtain an initial subsurface assessment. The same site may need different answers at different stages.
Collect boundaries, plans, depth of interest, constraints and information already available from the archaeological team. A method is not assigned solely by site land use.
Check feasibility
Access, surface conditions, conductive ground, metal interference and electrode contact affect methods differently. Where uncertainty remains, checking response in a representative area can inform wider acquisition.
A requested depth is not a guaranteed depth. The plan must distinguish the objective, expected sensitivity and conditions that could prevent it from being achieved.
Choose and justify the combination
The comparison matrix supports discussion rather than automatic prescription. The final choice defines coverage, checks, interpretation criteria and deliverables, explaining why a method is included or excluded.
An integrated survey is justified when it adds useful information. A well-designed single method can be more appropriate than multiple acquisitions without a shared question.
Agree the deliverables
Georeferenced maps, radargrams, sections and reporting should make assumptions traceable and distinguish surveyed from unsurveyed areas. Data value also depends on usability by the archaeological and design teams.
Certainty about the identity of every anomaly is not promised. Reports state uncertainty and possible follow-up, separating instrumental surveying from archaeological assessment.
Comparison by survey objective
| Method | Information | Conditions to check |
|---|---|---|
| GPR | Subsurface reflections and continuity | Conductivity, surface, positioning and propagation |
| Magnetometry | Magnetic contrasts and anomaly distribution | Metal interference, sensor distance and contrast |
| Electrical resistivity | Resistivity contrasts | Electrode contact, geometry and interpretation |
| Integration | Hypotheses compared against different responses | Common reference, scales and data quality |
Related guides
Frequently asked questions
- Is there an absolutely best method?
- No. The most useful method depends on the required information and site conditions.
- Is the table sufficient to make the choice?
- No. It is qualitative guidance requiring project information and feasibility checks.
- What should be shared for assessment?
- Objective, boundary, available archaeological documents, planned excavations, access and constraints.
What information does your project need?
Share the objective, site constraints and required deliverables so we can assess an appropriate survey strategy.
Submit your case