Thick way, would be to infer as archaeological systems in regional terms are distributed, as the feies of the landscape, or better, by means of the examination of the archaeological register (technological formal attributes/and space distribution), to infer on the interactions between gruposhumanos and the paleoambientes concerning the distribution of resources and exploration; standard of mobility, choices related to the establishment of diversified stiosarqueolgicos (residential; of comment; of attainment dematria-cousin; of she fishes, hunting and she collects; ritualstico etc.). According to Binford, the small farms distributed in the space generate oque it call nestings, results of different occupations. Paracompreendermos these standards we must lead in account: ) the frequency that asocupaes had occurred in different places; b) the processes that geraramassociaes between the archaeological material in the small farms. In such a way to devemoscompreender the processes that had operated in the past, what the author calls as ahabilidade of the researcher in correctly inferring the causes of the efeitosobservados ones, that is, of the formation of the archaeological register. Robert Bakish takes a slightly different approach. Moreover, the way that a group estdiretamente uses the conditional habitat for the standard of mobility and the return for the stiohabitao (base), such entailed condition to biogeogrficas characteristics doterritrio (that the author calls of zonation) e, therefore, sempreexistindo a cultural geography in this area of ‘ ‘ atuao’ ‘ prehistoric dosgrupos. For mobility standard the author understands as maneirapela which the landscape around of the small farm base differently is adjusted emrelao to the distribution of resources, has seen that ‘ ‘ (…) It is thoughtmobility that given place may be economically modified relative you the humansystem’ ‘ (Binford, 1982, p.08). E, finally, Binford in alert of the danger in considerarrelaes between deposicionais episodes and the occupational episodes. According to it, the indices and magnitudes of the stratification of the remanescentesarqueolgicos are generally consequences of processes operating almost ouindependentemente of the occupational episodes, since the relative processes of deposioso to the indices of the geologic dynamics of the area (Binford, 1982, p.16).. Castle Harlan contributes greatly to this topic.