• Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage
• 2013-2022close
• Other research products close
• Lecture close
• Digital Humanities and Cultural Her... close

Natural language processing (NLP) for detecting lexical semantic change and linguistic linked open data (LLOD) are two areas of research that have shown promising results in the latest years. However, their potential of being considered together for analysing and representing semantic change from a humanistic perspective needs further study and development. The talk will present an overview of theoretical aspects, NLP techniques and LLOD formalisms intended to this purpose, and will focus on a project developed as a humanities use case within the COST Action “Nexus Linguarum - European network for Web-centred linguistic data science.” The discussion will include preliminary thoughts on the conception of a system that combines dictionary information with corpus evidence, and provides multilingual diachronic ontologies for humanities research.

Isabel Crespo, Europeana Education Specialist and ENA Education Community Manager, presenta Europeana Impact Playbook. Per ajudar els professionals del patrimoni cultural a ampliar la comprensió de com el que fan contribueix a provocar el canvi, Europeana ha desenvolupat Europeana Impact Framework, al nucli del qual es troba Europeana Impact Playbook, en accés obert disponible a Europeana Pro. El recurs ofereix un enfocament en quatre fases per ajudar a dissenyar, mesurar, narrar i avaluar l’impacte de forma flexible i adaptable. Com a cas pràctic d’aplicació, es mostra el MOOC Digital education with cultural heritage 6977-cat.mp4 6977-eng.mp4

Agencification phenomenon in the EU has led to concerns about controls over EU agencies’ actions. As the quantity and ‘quality’, i.e., strength of de jure powers, of EU agencies have grown in the last decades, so does the system of control over agencies show its development. The controls over all EU agencies with the de jure decision-making powers as well as the European Central Bank within the Single Supervisory Mechanism have been supported with the establishment of Boards of Appeal, which count 9 entities. Like with the agencification phenomenon however, the establishment and characteristics of the Boards vary greatly from agency to agency without clear indications as to why the differences (should) exist and what exact role and how much discretion (should) be given to the Boards. As this unclarities put the legitimacy of the system of controls of EU agencies under pressure, an attempt to build a common system of review of agency action by the Boards seems desirable. To contribute to this ultimate goal of our study, this chapter offers a historical overview of agencification and review of agency action in the EU, rationales behind the creation of agencies’ appeal bodies and an attempt of classification of different boards to enhance comprehension and development of a common system of review of agency action. For learning purposes, we look at the system of administrative review in the US. We base our analysis on relevant secondary legislation, such as agencies’ founding acts, rules of procedure, case-law in the EU and in the US and relevant academic literature.

Agencification phenomenon in the EU has led to concerns about controls over EU agencies’ actions. As the quantity and ‘quality’, i.e., strength of de jure powers, of EU agencies have grown in the last decades, so does the system of control over agencies show its development. The controls over all EU agencies with the de jure decision-making powers as well as the European Central Bank within the Single Supervisory Mechanism have been supported with the establishment of Boards of Appeal, which count 9 entities. Like with the agencification phenomenon however, the establishment and characteristics of the Boards vary greatly from agency to agency without clear indications as to why the differences (should) exist and what exact role and how much discretion (should) be given to the Boards. As this unclarities put the legitimacy of the system of controls of EU agencies under pressure, an attempt to build a common system of review of agency action by the Boards seems desirable. To contribute to this ultimate goal of our study, this chapter offers a historical overview of agencification and review of agency action in the EU, rationales behind the creation of agencies’ appeal bodies and an attempt of classification of different boards to enhance comprehension and development of a common system of review of agency action. For learning purposes, we look at the system of administrative review in the US. We base our analysis on relevant secondary legislation, such as agencies’ founding acts, rules of procedure, case-law in the EU and in the US and relevant academic literature.

Agencification phenomenon in the EU has led to concerns about controls over EU agencies’ actions. As the quantity and ‘quality’, i.e., strength of de jure powers, of EU agencies have grown in the last decades, so does the system of control over agencies show its development. The controls over all EU agencies with the de jure decision-making powers as well as the European Central Bank within the Single Supervisory Mechanism have been supported with the establishment of Boards of Appeal, which count 9 entities. Like with the agencification phenomenon however, the establishment and characteristics of the Boards vary greatly from agency to agency without clear indications as to why the differences (should) exist and what exact role and how much discretion (should) be given to the Boards. As this unclarities put the legitimacy of the system of controls of EU agencies under pressure, an attempt to build a common system of review of agency action by the Boards seems desirable. To contribute to this ultimate goal of our study, this chapter offers a historical overview of agencification and review of agency action in the EU, rationales behind the creation of agencies’ appeal bodies and an attempt of classification of different boards to enhance comprehension and development of a common system of review of agency action. For learning purposes, we look at the system of administrative review in the US. We base our analysis on relevant secondary legislation, such as agencies’ founding acts, rules of procedure, case-law in the EU and in the US and relevant academic literature.

Eine Präsentation der erreichten und anvisierten Ziele der Initiative „Forschungsdatenmanagement“ der Berlin-Brandenburgischen Akademie der Wissenschaften von Reinhold Kliegl, Katja Marciniak und Alexander Czmiel (Stand: 24.02.2022).

Im Rahmen der Akademievorträge an brandenburgischen Schulen 2021/22 bot die Initiative "Forschungsdatenmanagement" den Schülerinnen und Schülern einen Einblick in die Themen Datenorganisation und -sicherung. Denn die Menge an digitalen Daten auf dieser Erde wächst täglich. Umso wichtiger ist das Management der eigenen Daten, um den Überblick zu behalten – privat, aber auch im Studium oder Berufsleben. In der Wissenschaftswelt geben die „Leitlinien zur Sicherung guter wissenschaftlicher Praxis“ den sorgsamen Umgang mit den sogenannten „Forschungsdaten“ sogar vor. In den Geistes- und Kulturwissenschaften versteht man unter dem Begriff alle Quellen/Materialien und Ergebnisse, die im Zusammenhang einer Forschungsfrage gesammelt, erzeugt, beschrieben und/oder ausgewertet werden. Wie geht man mit diesen Daten am besten um und welche Tipps und Tricks kann man sich hier für seine private Datenorganisation abschauen? Der Vortrag sensibilisiert für die Relevanz von Datenmanagement und gibt einen datenzentrierten Einblick in (geistes-)wissenschaftliche Forschungsprozesse.

Die vorgestellte technikgeschichtliche Studie untersucht die Einführung der elektronischen Datenverarbeitung in der Schweizerischen Bundesverwaltung von 1964 bis 1982. Sie geht der Frage nach, warum der Computer ein selbstverständlicher Teil des Alltags in der Bundesverwaltung wurde und wie er diesen Alltag programmierte. Die wenigen Studien, die zu diesem Thema vorliegen, stellen die Einführung der elektronischen Datenverarbeitung als – gelungenen oder gescheiterten – Versuch dar, auf das Wachstum der Verwaltung in den 1960er Jahren zu reagieren. Im Gegensatz dazu orientiert sich diese Studie nicht an den Resultaten der Verwaltungsautomation, sondern am Transformationsprozess und deutet ihn als organisatorischen Lernprozess. Die Entstehung des Zentralen Ausländerregisters bei der Eidgenössischen Fremdenpolizei und sein Wandel vom konjunkturpolitischen Steuerungsinstrument zum fremdenpolizeilichen Informationssystem stehen exemplarisch für diesen Prozess und sind Gegenstand dieser Studie. Anhand von Berichten, Protokollen, Briefen, Handbüchern und anderen Quellen aus dem Schweizerischen Bundesarchiv werden die zeitlich begrenzten Diskursräume nachgezeichnet, in denen er sich abgespielt hat. Bei der Analyse dieser Aushandlungszonen werden die Probleme in den Mittelpunkt gestellt, die verschiedene Akteure trotz unterschiedlicher Ziele in einen diskursiven Austausch brachten und zu einer gemeinsamen Handlungskoordination motivierten. Die Analysen legen die wechselseitigen Anpassungsleistungen zwischen Computer und Verwaltung frei und zeigen damit auf, warum sich Computer und Verwaltung gegenseitig beeinflusst und wie technologischer Wandel und organisatorische Lernprozesse ineinandergegriffen haben.

Interview and discussion with Dr. Thanik Lertcharnrit (formerly Sawang Lertrit), April 29, 2021, with Dr. Shannon Tushingham, Dr. William Lipe, Alec Bowder. This was part of Tushingham and Lipe���s Pioneers in Americanist Biography Project. Dr. Lertcharnrit is a graduate of WSU (2001 PhD, 1997 MA), and current Professor of Anthropology, Silpakorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.