Papers of the day   All papers

Living Machines: A study of atypical animacy

Comments

Dario Taraborelli: Authorship in scholarly papers should look like film credits. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.11140.pdf ht @LivingwMachines #CRediT https://t.co/nJyiaqipjI

1 replies, 142 likes


Living with Machines: We are happy to share our latest @arxiv preprint on atypical animacy, in particular the scenario in which typically inanimate objects (--> machines) are represented as living entities in nineteenth-century British books. We hope you enjoy the thread! https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.11140.pdf

3 replies, 91 likes


Dan Quintana: I like it. This puts the contributions front and center instead of buried at the end.

3 replies, 49 likes


Kasra Hosseini: Our paper on "Living Machines: A study of atypical animacy" is out on @arxiv. We used BERT (@huggingface implementation) to fine-tune four historical language models on the @britishlibrary books corpus. @LivingwMachines @turinginst @turinghut23

0 replies, 25 likes


Dr Mia Ridge: This thread represents a really exciting piece of #DigitalHumanities work from the @LivingwMachines team. Not only the process and the publication, but also the way they explored ways to credit different types of work beyond 'authorship'

0 replies, 20 likes


Living with Machines: Today Mariona, @f_nanni and Kaspar will speak about text mining, interdisciplinary research and our recent work on "Living Machines" at @dhoxss! Want to know more? Check out the thread here below! #DHOx2020 #digitalhumanities

0 replies, 18 likes


Katie McDonough: Check out our new paper! @LivingwMachines has been looking into atypical animacy in the @britishlibrary books corpus. I played a small role here, but it was a joy to work on this and learn about creating historical language models.

0 replies, 17 likes


Living with Machines: Our paper examining cases in which typically inanimate objects (such as machines) are represented as living entities has been accepted to #coling2020! While we work on the final version for https://coling2020.org/, this thread has an overview of our initial version #DH #NLProc https://t.co/JRsD7N6QFw

0 replies, 16 likes


Richard Jean So: This is great: new work @LivingwMachines + @RuthAhnert computational modelling of machine/human distinction in narrative/texts, contributing to a new history of the Industrial Revolution, ie how we learned to live with machines. Really cool + important new cultural analytics work

1 replies, 11 likes


heather froehlich: Quantitative DH people, read this article for a very good example of what a "literature review" is https://twitter.com/LivingwMachines/status/1265298189785145344

2 replies, 9 likes


Arts and Humanities Research Council: We're excited to see this work published, which was produced as part of “Living with Machines”, a project funded by Strategic Priorities Fund. It is a multidisciplinary collaboration delivered by AHRC @turinginst @britishlibrary and many others

0 replies, 6 likes


Ruth Ahnert: Very proud of my excellent colleagues on @LivingwMachines for this new paper. More exciting follow-ups employing this method to follow over the coming months.

0 replies, 4 likes


Dario Taraborelli: @LudoWaltman Love it. This preprint is still the best example I’ve seen to date: https://twitter.com/readermeter/status/1265514971846369283?s=21

0 replies, 3 likes


Living with Machines: In case you missed this thread from the team, read on for the benefits of interdisciplinary collaboration, applying new models for credit beyond 'authorship', computational linguistics, digital history, machines in the 19th century, language models and more!

0 replies, 3 likes


federico nanni: Super super happy to have been part of this work for the last few months, such a cool interdisciplinary collaboration!!

0 replies, 3 likes


piero_tasso: Awesome, although I am now in pain thinking of metadata handling and my typesetting workflow...

0 replies, 2 likes


Danny Kingsley: This is a good example although the headings don't match the CRediT taxonomy. Whatever we do it needs to be machine-readable to help analysis as per @csugimoto https://www.force11.org/media/video/keynote-talk-structural-disruptions-reward-system-science But we also need to be aware of issues @LizzieGadd https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2020/01/20/credit-check-should-we-welcome-tools-to-differentiate-the-contributions-made-to-academic-papers/

0 replies, 2 likes


Ismael K.G.: The almost accidental discovery that “humanness” needed identifying too was really interesting. Subjectivity seems to prevail, but the paper is written really nicely (i.e.: I think I got the gist of it!). Really cool stuff, thanks for reminding me about it, @f_nanni!

0 replies, 1 likes


Justin Gottschlich: What a fascinating idea ... To be clear, I'm not saying it's the way to go. But rather, an idea to consider. 😃

1 replies, 1 likes


Tim Elfenbein: Did @Jason_Scroggins & @IrenePasquetto see this?

0 replies, 1 likes


Content

Found on May 27 2020 at https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.11140.pdf

PDF content of a computer science paper: Living Machines: A study of atypical animacy