The Digital Humanities course for PhD students has been established at the PhD School for Humanities (Scuola di Dottorato in Scienze Umanistiche), University of Turin.
The course is designed and hosted by the newly born inter-departmental centre of DIgital Scholarship for the Humanities (DISH) directed by prof. Cristina Trinchero and chaired by prof. Ermanno Malaspina. DR2 core members are part of the scientific committee (Enrico Pasini, Paolo Tripodi and Guido Bonino) and of the management committee (Guido Bonino).
The duration of the course is 24 hrs and it will consist of six modules of 2 hours lessons + 2 hours workshops. Two modules will also engage DR2 members in teaching activities, namely:
Enrico Pasini on LaTex, March 11th, 09.00-13.00;
Paolo Tripodi, Guido Bonino and Eugenio Petrovich on Distant Reading and Data Driven Research in the History of Philosophy and the History of Ideas, March 25th, 10.00-12.00.
We are glad to announce an upcoming talk by Eugenio Petrovich at the DS² 2021 conference (Digital Studies of Digital Science) @UCLouvain. Here more details on the program.
The conference aims to connect two groups of scholars working on separate trends: the digitalizing of science’s products on one side, and the spread of digital methods on the other side (network and citation analysis, textual analysis and other tools of the digital humanities). The conference will take place, virtually, from March 15–18, 2021. Among the speakers, keynote talks will be held by Katy Börner, Sabina Leonelli, and Christophe Malaterre.
Eugenio Petrovich will present his work on Acknowledgments Co-Mention Networks: A new method for mapping the social structure of scholarly fields.
The University of Amsterdam’s interdisciplinary Research Priority Area Humane AI is looking for 3 postdoctoral researchers in the areas of law, social sciences and humanities. The overarching goal of these positions is to develop insights and principles for responsible and human-centric AI from a Social Science-Humanities (SSH) perspective: How can SSH research contribute to responsible AI, e.g. in sectors like media, culture/language or justice; what are the contextual socio-economic circumstances that need to be fulfilled for really responsible AI?; what is irresponsible AI? What is the role of human behaviour, law and ethics in creating the framework conditions for responsible AI?
The talk presents Petrovich’s research (still in progress) on the acknowledgements found in the top-five analytic philosophy journals. Acknowledgements are shown to be a fruitful source of information to reconstruct the social context of analytic philosophy, alongside a network of informal collaborations.
In the video, you will find all the details of the research:
Sentiment analysis is a common task in literary studies, yet sitting outside the mainstream of analytic computational procedures applied to philosophical corpora. Critic facets of sentiment analysis procedures for historical-philosophical analysis lie primarily on tools’ dictionary-dependancy, from which follow difficulties in obtaining in-depth historical understanding and the possibility of arbitrary biases in interpretation of both the retrieved sentiment and its object. However, reasons for such a sidelining hold when they are referred to techniques and workflows commonly deployed and followed in order to achieve sentiment analysis, while wanting to perform such a task might not be a radically flawed endeavour per se, as long as researchers set a well-grounded research framework.
The workshop’s programme anticipates a thorough examination of existing tools, approaches and workflows as well as of preliminary steps such as textual preprocessing, and it is uncommonly devoted to the analysis of 18th century texts.
The workshop fills in the context of the project “DiSpecs – Distant Spectators. Distant Reading for Periodicals of the Enlightenment”, funded by CLARIAH-AT and in cooperation with the Institute for Interactive Systems and Data Science, the Know-Center GmbH Graz and the Centre for Information Modelling – Austrian Centre for Digital Humanities (ZIM-ACDH) and the Institute for Romance Studies. The project aims to investigate the digitized, TEI encoded and semantically enriched texts of The Spectators (http://gams.uni-graz.at/mws), with quantitative methods of data analysis referred to as distant reading and macroanalysis (topic modeling, stylometry, meme diffusion, sentiment analysis and community detection).
The 18th-century journalistic genre of “spectators” (or moralistic sheets) had a large audience of urban readers and played an essential role in public opinion genesis. This project endeavours to create an integral database for all the moralistic press in French, Italian, Spanish, English, German, and Portuguese. In this context, the Spectator discourses’ quantitative analysis aims to enhance and improve micro-narration studies regarding the repetition of motifs throughout different journals.
We are pleased to forward information about a PostDoc Fellowship in Ontology in Trento.
Research will focus on the study of ontology for industry with the possibility to engage in both foundational ontology and the development of a domain ontology for a real industrial case. The research topics will be fixed depending on your interests. The selection will be based on your academic titles and research record.
Application deadline: Jan. 13, 2021 (see below)
Your research will focus on the use of applied ontology as a driver for data and information interoperability, following the FAIR data principles, in the industrial domain and in particular in areas like aerospace, manufacturing and material engineering. You will work on three types of activities (emphasis depends on your own interests): (1) study and formalization of the relationships across existing top-level and middle-level ontologies including the identification of commonalities and formal alignments among them; (2) collaborate in the development and implementation of an ecosystem of ontologies and knowledge bases for automatic or semi-automatic data exchange (preserving semantic interpretation); (3) collaborate on the topics of the European project “OntoCommons”.
What can quantitative methods tell us about the differences between the Analytic and the Continental philosophical traditions? Attempts to define, characterize and distinguish the two have led to such a variety of positions that even the most cautious proposals have been put into question (Glock, 2008). The difficulties in identifying sufficient or necessary differentiation criteria – be they doctrinal, methodological, stylistic or thematic – seem to call for a different approach. It was 1993 when Michael Dummet in his Origins of Analytical Philosophy compared the analytic and the continental traditions to the Rhine and the Danube: rivers that after rising close to one another flow into different seas. What if, instead of attempting to provide a cartography of the two rivers, were we to dive into their waters? What follows is a brief exploration of some possible applications of quantitative methods to the study of the differences between the two traditions. As any exploration, it is not meant to provide conclusive results on the subject, but rather to shed light on further possible routes.
The assessed corpus consists of all the articles published between 1980 and 2018 by four Anglophone philosophy journals, two of them belonging to the analytic tradition (“Philosophical Studies”, “Mind”) and two of them belonging to the continental tradition (“Continental Philosophy Review”, “Research in Phenomenology”). Because of the comparative nature of the study, the journals were chosen both on the basis of their relevance – in terms of average number of weighted citations – and on the basis of their representativeness: all four journals explicitly present themselves as being part of one of the two traditions. In conducting the textual analysis, the “analytic” and “continental” corpora have also been divided into further subcorpora by decades of publication, in order to allow for the results to show eventual changes over time.
The text mining software employed to assess the corpus is Lancsbox, developed at Lancaster University by Vaclav Brezina, Matthew Timperley and Anthony McEnery. It has been chosen because it allows for a variety of analysis on the language data that are present in a given corpus, such as type/token ratio, frequency, dispersion, keyword generation and collocation. The collocation graphs below have been generated by using Gephi, a network exploration software developed by Mathieu Bastian and Eduardo Ramos Ibañez.