Experimentation and the Machine, discussing the replication of prehistoric gestures with automated systems and their pitfalls

In recent years there has been a rise of the use of mechanical, automated systems in archaeological experimentation. Machines have been used in several experimental contexts, with varying degrees of justification and realism, to reproduce repetitive gestures and/or produce data on the behaviour of certain materials. Robots can and have been used to grind organic matter on stone tools in to produce use-wear, they have been used to make stone blanks and test different percussion angles on several materials and they were even used in projectiles experiments, shooting both spears and arrows with crossbow-like devices and air-cannons.
These third-generation experiments can undoubtedly bring new data for consideration, proving to be efficient for certain situations with very limited questions, allows for a limitation of variables and standardisation in a search for replication and the creation of interpretative models. There is however the question of how these results can be used effectively to interpret past behaviour and technologies. Understanding the mechanisms behind the creation of these standards in use is critical to
To understand prehistoric adhesives, they have been almost solely investigated using mechanical tests in laboratory settings. While these tests allow us to isolate specific variables and produce replicable results, they do not reflect actualistic working conditions and gestures. Comparing mechanical tests and actualistic experiments could lead to new discussions and conclusions about the benefits and pitfalls of automated systems.