• Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage
• Publicationsclose
• Research dataclose
• Research softwareclose
• 2018-2022close
• 050905 science studies close
• European Commission close
• EU close
• English close

This article examines algorithmic trading and some key failures and risks associated with it, including so-called algorithmic ‘flash crashes’. Drawing on documentary sources, 189 interviews with market participants, and fieldwork conducted at an algorithmic trading firm, we argue that automated markets are characterized by tight coupling and complex interactions, which render them prone to large-scale technological accidents, according to Perrow’s normal accident theory. We suggest that the implementation of ideas from research into high-reliability organizations offers a way for trading firms to curb some of the technological risk associated with algorithmic trading. Paradoxically, however, certain systemic conditions in markets can allow individual firms’ high-reliability practices to exacerbate market instability, rather than reduce it. We therefore conclude that in order to make automated markets more stable (and curb the impact of failures), it is important to both widely implement reliability-enhancing practices in trading firms and address the systemic risks that follow from the tight coupling and complex interactions of markets.

Interventionism analyses causal influence in terms of correlations of changes under adistribution of interventions. But the correspondence between correlated changes andcausal influence is not obvious. I probe its plausibility with a problem-case involvingvariables related as time derivative (velocity) to integral (position), such that the lattervariable must change given an intervention on the former unless dependencies areintroduced among the testing and controlling interventions. Under the orthodox criteria such interventions will fail to be appropriate for causal analysis. I consider various alternatives, including permitting control interventions to be chancy, restricting the available models and mitigating variation of off-path variables. None of these work. I then present a fourth suggestion which modifies the interventionist criteria in order to permit interventions which can influence other variables than just their own targets. The correspondence between correlated changes and causal influence can thereby saved when dependencies are introduced among such interventions. This modification and the required dependencies, I argue, are perfectly in line with practice and may also assist in a wider class of cases.

This article pursues a translational approach to the securitization of migration. It argues that sociotechnical processes of identification at the border can be conceived of as translations into legible identities of individuals who are unknown to authorities. The article contributes to the materiality debate on securitization across Critical Security Studies (CSS) and Science and Technology Studies (STS) by answering the call to conduct empirical explorations of security, and by revisiting the potential of the early sociology of translation (i.e. actor-network theory) to account for the identification of border crossers. Data collection was conducted at four identification facilities in the Hellenic Republic. Three sets of implications for the CSS-STS debate on the materiality of securitization are discussed. First, a translational approach can replace a representational understanding of identity with a performative apprehension of identification. Second, adopting a translational approach leads to acknowledge that the identification encounter is mediated by multiple, heterogeneous actors. It thus helps to open technological black boxes and reveal the key role of material qualities, affordances and limitations of artefacts. Third, a translational approach to the securitization of migration can help advance the field of ‘alterity processing’ by appreciating the de facto re-arrangements of institutional orders elicited by techno-political alignments with global security regimes.

Normative, scientific and economic pledges to Electronic Health Record (EHR) data-driven research (for health and wealth) attempt to reconfigure public health data as an asset for realising multiple values across healthcare, research and finance. In this paper, we examine some of the expectations, frictions and uncertainties involved with the assetisation of de-identified NHS patient data by (primary care) research services in UK. We introduce the concept of 'asymmetric assetisation divergence' to study the various practices of configuring and using this data, both as a continuously generated resource to be extracted and as an asset to be circulated in the knowledge economy. As data assetisation and exploitations grow bigger and more diverse, the capitalisation of these datasets may constitute EHR data-driven research in healthcare as an attractive technoscientific activity, but one limited to those actors with specific sociotechnical resources in place to fully exploit them at the required scale.

The start of management education in India in the early 1960s has been dominantly described from the perspective of ‘Americanisation’, characterised by isomorphism and mimicry. Existing scholarship has avoided the question of how management education and knowledge were reconciled and naturalised with India’s specific socio-economic contexts. This article addresses the issue and provides a situated account of this complex history by delving into the establishment of the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, one of India’s first and most prominent management schools. Using the concept of sociotechnical imaginary developed by Jasanoff and Kim, the analysis describes how the development of management education and research was aligned with the objective of nation building. The article shows that the project to start management education did not take off before the capitalist connotations, associated with business education, were subtly removed and a narrative was created that put management education in the context of India’s wider development trajectory. Under influence of a changing political atmosphere in the late 1960s, a particular imaginary on the role of management knowledge and education unfolded in the development of the institute, giving the field in India a distinct character in the early 1970s.

International audience; Most philosophers of science do philosophy ‘on’ science. By contrast, others do philosophy ‘in’ science (‘PinS’), i.e., they use philosophical tools to address scientific problems and to provide scientifically useful proposals. Here, we consider the evidence in favour of a trend of this nature. We proceed in two stages. First, we identify relevant authors and articles empirically with bibliometric tools, given that PinS would be likely to infiltrate science and thus to be published in scientific journals (‘intervention’), cited in scientific journals (‘visibility’) and sometimes recognized as a scientific result by scientists (‘contribution’). We show that many central figures in philosophy of science have been involved in PinS, and that some philosophers have even ‘specialized’ in this practice. Second, we propose a conceptual definition of PinS as a process involving three conditions (raising a scientific problem, using philosophical tools to address it, and making a scientific proposal), and we ask whether the articles identified at the first stage fulfil all these conditions. We show that PinS is a distinctive, quantitatively substantial trend within philosophy of science, demonstrating the existence of a methodological continuity from science to philosophy of science.

PurposeSharing information about work processes has proven to be difficult. This applies especially to information shared from those who participate in a process to those who remain outsiders. The purpose of this article is to increase understanding of how professionals document their work practices with a focus on information making by analysing how archaeologists document their information work in archaeological reports.Design/methodology/approachIn total 47 Swedish archaeological reports published in 2018 were analysed using close reading and constant comparative categorisation.FindingsEven if explicit narratives of methods and work process have particular significance as documentation of information making, the evidence of information making is spread out all over the report document in (1) procedural narratives, (2) descriptions of methods and tools, (3) actors and actants, (4) photographs, (5) information sources, (6) diagrams and drawings and (7) outcomes. The usability of reports as conveyors of information on information making depends more on how a forthcoming reader can live with it as a whole rather than how to learn of the details it recites.Research limitations/implicationsThe study is based on a limited number of documents representing one country and one scholarly and professional field.Practical implicationsIncreased focus on the internal coherence of documentation and the complementarity of different types of descriptions could improve information sharing. Further, descriptions of concepts that refer to work activities and the situation when information came into being could similarly improve their usability.Originality/valueThere is little earlier research on how professionals and academics document and describe their information activities.

According to this journal article by Sam Weiss Evans, CSS' Matthias Leese and Dagmar Rychnovská, science and technology play a central role in the contemporary governance of security, both as tools for the production of security and as objects of security concern. Scholars are increasingly seeking to not only critically reflect on the interplays between science, technology and security, but also engage with the practices of security communities that shape and are shaped by science and technology. To further help this growth of interest in security topics within science and technology studies (STS), the article explores possible modes of socio-technical collaboration with security communities of practice. Social Studies of Science, 51 (2) ISSN:0306-3127 ISSN:1460-3659

Abstract This article focuses on the U.S. diplomat and nuclear arms control negotiator Gerald (Gerry) Coat Smith in order to cast new light on the importance of diplomats in the context of the set of international activities currently labelled as “science diplomacy.” Smith, a lawyer by training, was a key negotiator in many international agreements on post‐WW2 atomic energy projects, from those on uranium prospecting and mining, to reactors technologies to later ones on non‐proliferation and disarmament. His career in science (nuclear) diplomacy also epitomized the shortcomings of efforts to align other countries’ posture on nuclear affairs to U.S. wishes. In particular, the unswerving diplomat increasingly understood that strong‐arm tactics to dissuade other countries from acquiring nuclear weapons would not limit proliferation. Not only did this inform later U.S. diplomacy approaches, but it lent itself to the ascendancy of the new notion of “soft power” as critical to the re‐definition of international affairs.