• Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage
• Research dataclose
• Research softwareclose
• Audiovisual close
• ZENODO close

The object of this study is to develop methods for automatically annotating the argumentative role of sentences in scientific abstracts. Working from Medline abstracts, we classified sentences into four major argumentative roles: objective, method, result, conclusion. The idea is that if the role of each sentence can be marked up, then this metadata can be used during information retrieval to seek for particular types of information such as novelty, conclusions, methodologies, aims/goals of a scientific piece of work.

VIdeo tutorial about image annotation and georeferencing with Recogito.

After a theoretical introduction on the concepts of reproducible science and the Web of Data, we will present the methodology of scientific notebooks (e.g. Jupyter Notebooks). In this context, we will present a step-by-step approach to the creation of a scientific notebook in history: we will load a dataset from the Open Data of the institute and then apply filters and calculations on the data. A presentation and analysis layer with graphics will complete our research product with enrichments from external data and vocabularies from the Semantic Web. This will make our output reproducible and documented with text enriched with semantic schemas (schema.org) and disambiguation authorities (GND, dpPedia, Wikidata...), data sources and computer code. The presentation does not require advanced technical knowledge. It is aimed at beginners. The technical demonstration, in the second part, is deliberately simple in content and will be commented on as it goes along.

Contributing metadata to the Ethnic and Migrant Minorities' (EMM) Survey Registry as a professional polling/survey company A training video targeting professional polling/survey companies to entice them to document their surveys on the EMM Survey Registry Target Audience for the video: Professional polling/survey companies producing quantitative surveys on ethnic and migrant minorities’ integration and/or inclusion

This is a recording of a presentation given at the workshop on 'Reproducible research in Archaeology' at Durham University on 15th October 2021. The workshop included an introduction to what reproducibility is, why it is important for archaeological research and how you can make your research workflow reproducible. It also included some case studies demonstrating reproducible workflows used in archaeological research. This workshop was organised by Software Sustainability Institute Fellows - Alison Clarke and Emma Karoune. The slides from the presentation are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5564648.

In this video is described how prepare a printer ready map in QGIS (http://qgis.org). The original file used in here can be found at github https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dieza/curso_r/master/taula_incompleta.csv. The whole set is about the circulation of obsidian in the western mediterranean during the Neolithic. Terradas, X., Gratuze, B., Bosch, J., Enrich, R., Esteve, X., Oms, F. X., & Ribé, G. (2014). Neolithic diffusion of obsidian in the western Mediterranean: new data from Iberia. Journal of archaeological Science, 41, 69-78. Tykot, R. H. (2017). Obsidian Studies in the Prehistoric Central Mediterranean: After 50 Years, What Have We Learned and What Still Needs to Be Done?. Open Archaeology, 3(1), 264-278. This video is part of serie of them, the material needed to do the tutorial is indicated in the video itself or can be downloaded for github https://github.com/dieza/curso_r

Traditional humanities research has been leveraged but also destabilised by the increasing accessibility of digitized sources and computational tools for analysis. As traditional close reading methods alone are no longer sufficient to analyse such an unprecedented mass of digital data, a plethora of platforms have appeared in order to help researchers query and visualise the networks and patterns latent in these sources. However, this flood of data and push-button technologies has also threatened to obscure through abundance and instill in scholars a false sense of mastery. Some scholars have criticized DH for its naive and starry-eyed application of computational techniques, citing not only how the uncritical adoption of black-box technologies affects substantive research but also how it reproduces a positivism at odds with the purpose of humanities inquiry (e.g., Liu 2012; Chun 2013; Jagoda 2013; Raley 2013; Allington et al 2016; Brennan 2017; Grimshaw 2018). Both uncritical DH practice and the software it employs can be compared to a “Mechanical Turk,” with the decisions and interventions made by the researcher hidden from view and only the well-oiled and seemingly autonomous product on display. These trends have constituted a crisis for humanities scholarship but also an extraordinary opportunity to transform the field. In this presentation, we introduce the Digital History Advanced Research Projects Accelerator (DHARPA), a diverse and interdisciplinary research and development laboratory based in the University of Luxembourg’s Centre for Contemporary and Digital History (C²DH). While software development is central to our project, our aim is not merely to build more tools but to encourage methodologies that self-reflexively examine the interaction of technology and historical practice. We want to show how the application of expertise works in tandem with technology to produce knowledge, how digitally enabled research is not a product but rather a process, reliant on the critical engagement of the scholar. We want scholars to open the black box and to be empowered to tinker with what’s inside. DHARPA is multifaceted: Software and infrastructure development: Our software will be free and open-source and backed by a long-term sustainability plan and training opportunities to encourage widespread and confident adoption. Users will be able to run the software remotely or to download the software for local use, and to rely on a generalizable hosting infrastructure that ensures privacy, portability, and sustainability. Built for both humanities scholars and social scientists, we plan to include modules for: data ingestion, data standardisation, textual analysis, network analysis, geographical analysis and bring them within a seamless environment, where work can flow between tasks from experimentation and modelling to presentation and dissemination. Developing best practice through design: Central to DHARPA is the creation of a Virtual Research Environment that will enable scholars to engage with their data while promoting critical historical practice. Our interactive software will cultivate the holistic practice of interweaving data, code, computational functionality, and metadata with a narrative of researcher’s choices and actions. Documenting academic labour makes its value evident, while also making it reproducible and keeping it honest: it allows scholars to take ownership of their interventions. Collaborations: DHARPA staffs a responsive laboratory that will rapidly prototype and launch applied solutions. We work with other academics at the C²DH and within a wider, international and interdisciplinary scholarly community. Training and outreach: As the project progresses, we will be introducing our software to the academic community through workshops at the University of Luxembourg and international conferences as well as through publications. Further to our ethos that scholarship is an iterative process, we welcome feedback to improve our software and specifications. {"references": ["Allington, D., Brouillette, S. and David Golumbia. (2016). \"Neoliberal tools (and archives): A political history of digital humanities.\" LA Review of Books 1.", "Brennan, T. \"The Digital-Humanities Bust.\" The Chronicle of Higher Education (2017) ProQuest. Web. 10 Mar. 2018", "Chun, W. (2013). The Dark Side of the Digital Humanities. www.c21uwm. com/2013/01/09/the-dark-side-of-the-digital-humanities-part-1", "Grimshaw, M. (2018). \"Towards a manifesto for a critical digital humanities: critiquing the extractive capitalism of digital society\". Palgrave Communications, 4: 21. DOI: 10.1057/s41599-018-0075-y", "Jagoda, P. (2013). The Dark Side of the Digital Humanities. www.c21uwm. com/2013/01/09/the-dark-side-of-the-digital-humanities-part-3", "Liu, A. (2012). \"Where is cultural criticism in the digital humanities?\" In Debates in Digital Humanities, ed. M. K. Gold. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 490\u2013509", "Raley, R. (2013). The Dark Side of the Digital Humanities. www.c21uwm.com/2013/01/09/the-dark-side-of-the-digital-humanities-part-4"]} Luxembourg National Research Fund (FNR)

While traditionally, the transmission of medieval texts is studied by means of stemmatics, certian types of textuality are well-known as being particularly resistent to traditional methods. This is also the case with annotations. While annotations can behave text-like, it is more often the case that each individual gloss must be treated as an autonomous entity. In different manuscripts different combinations of glosses are combined so that two manuscripts may contain a very different assembly of glosses and look dissimilar, while being closely related. In such cases, network analysis proves handy as a mean to reveal connection between manuscripts and trace the patterns of transmission of particular annotations, while opening new ways of using this transmission as a proxy for studying the intellectual networks that participated in such an exchange. In this presentation, I will exemplify this approach on the corpus of early medieval annotations to the Etymologiae of Isidore of Seville, the most important medieval Latin encyclopaedia. More specifically, it can be presupposed that most of the glosses to this text came into being in the context of its use for teaching in Carolingian period (c. 750 – 900). Their transfer, thus, may be related to the circulation of schoolmasters, students, and books through the networks of Carolingian schools. This talk was presented at the Networks of Manuscripts, Networks of Texts conference (21-23 Oct 2020, Huygens Institute, Amsterdam). This data presented in the talk was collected as a part of Innovating Knowledge project funded by the Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (VENI project 275-50-016)

Creating transcriptions can be a tedious job. The computer tool Transkribus can ease the process after some training. In this digital workshop, we will commence with the knowledge you gained in the basic training. You will now learn about judging the quality of a model, structure tags and automatic training of structure through P2PaLA, combining existing transcriptions with images (T2I), future options with tables and NERs-tagging. This workshop was organised through a Zoom-meeting. The workshop is in English and is provided in by Annemieke Romein, a postdoctoral researcher at Huygens ING and experienced Transkribus-user. The video can be found at: Date: May 19th, 2020; 1-4pm CEST. Location: online.

1st Lecture