Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
International Conferences on Luminescence and Electron Spin Resonance Dating are held every three years, most recently in Copenhagen in 2023. Here we review the closing discussion of this meeting and discuss subjects of current debate: issues related to aliquot size in luminescence dating; statistical models for age calculation when working on well-bleached samples; the importance and limitations of dose recovery tests; estimation of water content averaged over sediment history; age calculation methods and software, and the need for intercomparisons; and, finally, errors and uncertainties in luminescence dating. For each topic, we review the existing literature, summarise the state-of-the-art and provide recommendations based on our views and interpretation as our contribution to the debate. We suggest that: aliquot selection should be systematically questioned rather than routinely applied; the Central Age Model leads to sample dependent but systematic age underestimation; light recovery tests are preferred to dose recovery tests (although the two are equivalent at lower doses); there is considerable room for improvement in our methods for lifetime water content estimation; and a careful, thorough treatment of errors and uncertainties (especially in dose rate) is required for reliable chronological modelling of luminescence ages.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Guérin et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: