Search

Slides used for the OpenMethods edit-a-thon during DH2023 Graz, 10.07.2023 Facilitators: Alíz Horvath, Christopher Nunn, Ulrike Wuttke. Tóth-Czifra, Erzsébet, Wuttke, Ulrike, Horváth, Alíz, Nunn, Christopher: “Amplifying unheard voices in Digital Humanities: an OpenMethods edit-a-thon”, in: Baillot, Anne, Tasovac, Toma, Scholger, Walter, & Vogeler, Georg. (2023, July 1). Digital Humanities 2023: Book of Abstracts. Digital Humanities 2023. Collaboration as Opportunity. (DH2023), Graz, Austria, p. 26-27, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7961822, OpenMethods is sustained by DARIAH-EU.

In our workshop, we invite Digital Humanists to explore the OpenMethods metablog as an innovative publication forum and to strengthen the representation of traditionally underrepresented languages and actors in Digital Humanities - particularly non-Anglophone, under-resourced languages (such as languages with non-Latin scripts) or female tool-makers - on the platform in particular and in the Digital Humanities discourse in general.

The aim of this poster is to provide an overview of the work carried out in the CLS INFRA project and its conclusions for the field of Computational Literary Studies.

Research assessment reform is crucial for the social sustainability of research infrastructures (RIs): RIs can only thrive in the long term if the researchers who contribute to their development and growth receive academic credit for the kind of work they do in and around research infrastructures. To put it bluntly, research infrastructures have a vested interest in supporting the reform of research assessment. But, conversely, ongoing attempts to reform research assessment can also benefit from the work of research infrastructures because RIs have a great deal of experience creating and maintaining public services for producing, curating and harvesting both traditional and non-traditional academic outputs. The goal of this paper is to outline DARIAH’s position on the importance of research assessment reform for thematic RIs and the importance of thematic RIs for research assessment reform at the European level.

ERICs (European Research Infrastructure Consortia) are European legal entities to facilitate the establishment and operation of Research Infrastructures with European interest. ERICs are increasingly asked to account for their operations (see debate on KPI in the ERIC Forum). At the same time, web services such as the EOSC Resource Catalogues, the SSH Open Marketplace, and OpenAire, provide possibilities to register and disseminate research outputs, making them ready for automatic harvesting. While the need for standardization of the description of ERIC provided services and content is still very much debated, there are also conceptual dimensions we would like to address in this paper. ERICs, by definition, create and operate in a landscape of distributed, co-created, network of processes. To summarize, services in the large domain of SSH, are increasingly ‘shared’ resources. In the spirit of Open Science and the further consolidation of the European Research Area, this interconnectedness can only be applauded. This is how the integrating function of ERICs materializes, and how we avoid the duplication of effort. At the same time, ERICs are also defined organizations with boundaries, and subject to individual assessments. To some extent ERICs are even in competition with each other, for visibility, user groups, in-kind contributions, funds allocated nationally and from the EC. This paper makes a first attempt to reflect about intrinsic challenges in accounting single nodes in a network of collaborating nodes. While each ERIC already defines its own policy of how to deal with this complexity according to their needs, there is a debate needed as to how to assess contributions to distributed infrastructures in a way which gives credit to all participating while at the same time avoid mis-allocation, double counting and so on, in particular in the context of the development of the EOSC. The matter of ethical, balanced, effective research assessment which has been discussed extensively in the realm of scholarly communication (Leiden Manifesto) also needs to be addressed in the area of research infrastructures. Such a reflection will inform the current discourse of further standardizing the metadata schema which are behind the different catalogues; the search for meaningful Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for ERICs and the further shaping of the collaboration and division of labor between ERIC’s at national and European level. This paper takes the current discourse around the DARIAH service portfolio as an example/case to highlight these more generic challenges. It also attempts to sort out various sources of ‘assignment uncertainty’ of contributions (e.g. differences in controlled vocabularies, incompatibilities of metadata schemes, user-generated content, metrics of assignments, and policy decisions). While we focus the discussion on ERICs, our motivation to present this at the DARIAH Annual event is that it might be of particular interest to see how cultural heritage institutions (libraries, archives, museums…), in their roles as content providers also for ERICs are credited for their contribution to ERICs, and beyond. References: Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L. et al. Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature 520, 429–431 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a See also http://www.leidenmanifesto.org

Scholars see innovative means of disseminating their work and data as a chance to improve the process of sharing ideas with different audiences, thanks to technological affordances. They understand innovation either in terms of form (novel means of communicating ideas through different media), or access (opening up outputs and making them easily accessible) (cf. Maryl and Błaszczyńska 2021, p. 34). What we consider a “scholarly text” has thus become understood as an expression that can employ different media and engage creatively with underlying data. However, engaging with novel forms of communication poses new challenges to scholars, who may lack competencies, know-how, or adequate resources to take full advantage of innovative outputs (Tasovac et al. 2018). This presentation will outline the means of support provided by OPERAS Innovation Lab in establishing interdisciplinary, collaborative workflows for supporting innovative outputs in social sciences and humanities (SSH) throughout their lifecycle. The Lab provides guidelines on how to create and sustain FAIR innovative outputs in the SSH. The poster will highlight the ideas behind creating the OPERAS Innovation Lab and the activities that the Lab engages in.

Slides presented at the DARIAH-CZ national workshop on the 21st of October (https://lindat.cz/events/workshop2021) Having a vision and a strong commitment to open research has always been important to DARIAH as it brings on collaborative and innovative means of digitally enabled research. As Open Science practices are becoming a central condition of research funding, it is even more important to establish a dedicated discourse and community practices around the open research culture as it makes sense in the arts and humanities disciplines. The presentation aims to outline discipline-specific, yet widely interoperable models of Open Science emerging from community practices of arts and humanities. It will be shown how DARIAH-EU builds an open agenda for arts and humanities research that is firmly grounded in disciplinary realities. This includes: 1)Strengthening discourse and community practices around Open Humanities 2) Providing training and advocacy to implement open research practices 3) Building infrastructural components that enable open research practices across arts and humanities disciplines. 4) Providing a strong voice for arts and humanities research communities to be heard in European and national research policy debates, with special focus on career assessment

This report focuses on the metadata as a specific type of research data in the humanities by analysing key metadata elements – persistent identifiers (PIDs), abstracts, keywords and citations. It defines those elements, outlines challenges for processing them in the humanities and presents the challenges for GoTriple as the metadata aggregator of this kind of research data. The assumption is that GoTriple is a specific kind of research dataset on its own that can and will be reused by stakeholders such as other metadata aggregators, indexers, publishers, information services (i.e. providers of scholarly metrics), but also scientists interested in data-driven research (cultural analytics, scientometrics, bibliometrics, etc.). This demands a good understanding of key metadata elements important to GoTriple's aggregation and enrichment processes (abstracts, keywords) and their development (PIDs, citations). Chapter 1 defines the aim of the deliverable, context of its creation and its audience. Chapter 2 discusses the specificity of the research data in the humanities and this report’s position in the rich discussions on the topic. Chapter 3 – dedicated to PIDs – presents the overview of the topic and the challenges related to the PID’s uptake by the humanities, such as the role of cultural heritage data for the humanities, importance of bibliodiversity and multilingualism (subchapter 3.1), then it proceeds to the discussion of processing PIDs from GoTriple’s data providers by focusing on data dispersion and heterogeneity (subchapter 3.2). Chapter 4 – dedicated to keywords – begins with the typology of keywords and the expected standards they should adhere to (subchapter 4.1). Subchapter 4.2 tackles the issue of automated generation of keywords and proposes different approaches applicable in the context of GoTriple. In the subchapter 4.3 a current approach to keyword organisation in GoTriple is presented, with focus on the GoTriple vocabulary that responds to the need for keywords LOD-ification and can be in the future reused for automated keyword generation. Chapter 5 – dedicated to abstracts – starts with the comprehensive presentation of the abstract ecosystem, offering also a specific perspective on SSH. Subchapter 5.2 offers solutions to the issues of “missing abstracts” which are aimed at the needs of the GoTriple platform. Chapter 6 – dedicated to citations – offers an overview of the topic and its relevance to the SSH. In the subchapter 6.2 an analysis of issues related to GoTriple’s expression of citation data is presented (that relates especially to the challenge of processing different citation formats and citation data quality). Each chapter concludes with a summary of the guidelines for the specific metadata type for the humanities., The TRIPLE project (https://project.gotriple.eu/), which is financed under the Horizon 2020 framework (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/863420), under Grant Agreement No. 863420, with approx. 5.6 million Euros for a duration of 42 months (2019-2023). The content of this deliverable reflects only TRIPLE's view and the Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

The presentation was held during the DARIAH Bibliographical Data Working Group workshop – "Databases and information systems for research output: digital humanities outlook" (September, 30th 2022).&nbsp

Computational Literary Studies Infrastructure, funded by the Horizon2020 grant scheme, is a four-year, pan-European project that aims to unify the diverse landscape of computational text analysis, in terms of available texts, tools, methods, practices and so forth, within its growing international user community. The project started out in February 2021, meaning that it has been underway for just over a year. In our poster we discuss the various deliverables and activities that have come out of the CLS INFRA project in its first quarter to give an idea of its impact in practice.

Computational Literary Studies Infrastructure, funded by the Horizon2020 grant scheme, is a four-year, pan-European project that aims to unify the diverse landscape of computational text analysis, in terms of available texts, tools, methods, practices and so forth, within its growing international user community. The project started out in February 2021, meaning that it has been underway for just over a year. In our poster we discuss the various deliverables and activities that have come out of the CLS INFRA project in its first quarter to give an idea of its impact in practice.&nbsp

A major goal of curating natural history collections or cultural artefacts in museums, herbaria, libraries and archives is to create diverse and rich narratives around them. Their investigation by computational methods enables scholars to discover new connections and patterns, and helps to answer a whole range of research questions that were previously impossible to study. Each curated object is not only an informational resource for the researcher, it can also provide contexts, make visible the relationships between artefacts, people, publications, organisations, provenance, and events. However, in order to pursue research in this direction, good quality digital representations of the curated physical objects, as well as relevant datasets, that are not only accessible by humans but also by machines, are necessary. Related and derived datasets from these objects have the potential to foster cross-disciplinary collaborations (such as between biology, history, art or anthropology) thus providing a wider lens for contextualising, interpreting and creating knowledge in relation to cultural and natural heritage collections. By taking such curated objects and their digital representation as point of departure, this cross-disciplinary panel explores current trends and challenges via the theme of data-driven storytelling and FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, reusable) data. Despite large-scale digitisation and data mobilisation efforts, gaps remain within and between different collections. Objects in natural history museums are, for instance, not well connected with libraries, archives, art museums and other institutions which hold contextual information. A range of factors has contributed to this, including different domain specific practices, data standards, and funding schemes. The idea of Linked Open Data (LOD) and FAIR data addresses some of these issues, however, there are still social, technical and systematic challenges that hamper data-driven storytelling about objects in digitised collections. At the same time, we are noticing an increasing interest and understanding of FAIR and interdisciplinary collaboration both from funding agencies and user communities in the fields of digital cultural and natural heritage. This 60 minute panel firstly presents the following three position papers of 10 minutes each, that explore different perspectives and actors involved in data-driven storytelling through the curated objects: 1.The challenge of data discoverability and accessibility (Andreas Weber, University of Twente and Sharif Islam, DiSSCo): From the perspective of a researcher, how does one go about finding and using the objects that are needed to create the story? How does one find the contextual information and related entities (other objects of a similar type held in other institutions, other objects of different types collected/found/preserved by the same person, etc.)? What does allowing such discoverability mean for the collection holding institutions and the data providers? 2.The challenge of linking and integrating contextual data (Kerstin Arnold, Archives Portal Europe and Henning Scholz, Europeana): What are the social, technical, and systematic challenges for establishing links between different collections (either in the same or different discipline)? How do different (meta)data standards, inconsistent use of identifiers, lack of aligned vocabularies and semantic mapping create obstacles for data linking and enrichment? How could these obstacles be overcome? And who needs to be involved in that process? 3.Opportunities and challenges for data-driven storytelling (Sally Chambers, DARIAH-EU and Erzsébet Tóth-Czifra, DARIAH-EU): How can research infrastructures drive forward solutions with the objective of providing useful and re-usable (and FAIR) services to the end users? How can data-driven storytelling help us to bridge the infrastructural gaps between cultural and natural heritage collections and research? How can data-driven storytelling assist in highlighting research-driven digitisation priorities? What are the potential outcomes from these kinds of initiatives (Jupyter notebooks, code, demos etc.)? Taken together, we intend that these position papers will stimulate an open and interdisciplinary dialogue between cultural and natural heritage professionals, historians and natural scientists, research infrastructure experts and data scientists, as well as stimulating hands-on experimentation with data-driven storytelling. The session will result in a blogpost, showcased on the DARIAH Open blog, presenting the perspectives of the three position papers alongside a summary of the key topics raised during the interdisciplinary debate. It is also intended that the discussions can continue, for example, within the Europeana Aggregators’ Forum following the DARIAH Annual Event.

The aim of this poster is to provide an overview of the principal objectives of the newly started H2020 Computational Literary Studies (CLS) project- https://www.clsinfra.io. CLS is a infrastructure project works to develop and bring together resources of high-quality data, tools and knowledge to aid new approaches to studying literature in the digital age. Conducting computational literary studies has a number of challenges and opportunities from multilingual and bringing together distributing information. At present, the landscape of literary data is diverse and fragmented. Even though many resources are currently available in digital libraries, archives, repositories, websites or catalogues, a lack of standardisation hinders how they are constructed, accessed and the extent to which they are reusable (Ciotti 2014). CLS project aims to federate these resources, with the tools needed to interrogate them, and with a widened base of users, in the spirit of the FAIR and CARE principles (Wilkinson et al. 2016). The resulting improvements will benefit researchers by bridging gaps between greater- and lesser- resourced communities in computational literary studies and beyond, ultimately offering opportunities to create new research and insight into our shared and varied European cultural heritage. Rather than building entirely new resources for literary studies, the project is committed to exploiting and connecting the already-existing efforts and initiatives, in order to acknowledge and utilize the immense human labour that has already been undertaken. Therefore, the project builds on recently- compiled high-quality literary corpora, such as DraCor and ELTeC (Fischer et al. 2019, Burnard et al. 2021, Schöch et al. in press), integrates existing tools for text analysis, e.g. TXM, stylo, multilingual NLP pipelines (Heiden 2010, Eder et al. 2016), and takes advantage of deep integration with two other infrastructural projects, namely the CLARIN and DARIAH ERICs. Consequently, the project aims at building a coherent ecosystem to foster the technical and intellectual findability and accessibility of relevant data. The ecosystem consists of (1) resources, i.e. text collections for drama, poetry and prose in several languages, (2) tools, (3) methodological and theoretical considerations, (4) a network of CLS scholars based at different European institutions, (5) a system of short-term research stays for both early career researchers and seasoned scholars, (6) a repository for training materials, as well as (7) an efficient dissemination strategy. This is achieved through a collaboration between participating institutions: Institute of Polish Language at the Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland; University of Potsdam, Germany; Austrian Academy of Sciences, Austria; National University of Distance Education, Spain; École Normale Supérieure de Lyon, France; Humboldt University of Berlin, German; Charles University, Czech Republic; Digital Research Infrastructure for the Arts and Humanities, France; Ghent Centre for Digital Humanities, Ghent University, Belgium; Belgrade Centre for Digital Humanities, Serbia; Huygens Institute for the History of the Netherlands (Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences), Netherlands; Trier Center for Digital Humanities, Trier University, Germany; Moore Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Ireland; This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101004984. References Ciotti, Fabio. 2014. „Digital literary and cultural studies: the state of the art and perspectives“.Between4/8, 1-17.https://doi.org/10.13125/2039-6597/1392. Borgman, Christine. 2010. Scholarship in the Digital Age : Information, Infrastructure, andthe Internet. Cambridge, Mass & London: MIT Press. See https://www.dariah.euandhttps://www.clarin.eu. Burnard, Lou, Christof Schöch, and Carolin Odebrecht. 2021. „In search of comity: TEI fordistant reading“.Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative. https://doi.org/10.4000/jtei.3500. Eder, M., Rybicki, J. and Kestemont, M. 2016. Stylometry with R: a package forcomputational text analysis.R Journal, 8(1): 107-21.https://journal.r-project.org/archive/2016/RJ-2016-007/index.html Fischer, Frank, Ingo Börner, Matthias Göbel, Andrea Hechtl, Christopher Kittel, P. Miling, andPeer Trilcke. 2019. „Programmable Corpora: Introducing DraCor, an Infrastructure for theResearch on European Drama“. InBook of Abstractsof the Digital Humanities Conference2019. Utrecht: ADHO. Heiden, Serge. 2010. The TXM Platform: Building Open-Source Textual Analysis SoftwareCompatible with the TEI Encoding Scheme. In24th PacificAsia Conference on Language,Information and Computation(pp. 10 p.). Sendai, Japon.Retrieved fromhttp://halshs.archivesouvertes.fr/docs/00/54/97/64/PDF/paclic24_sheiden.pdf Schöch, Christof, Tomaz Erjavec, Roxana Patras, and Diana Santos (in press). „Creatingthe European Literary Text Collection (ELTeC): Challenges and Perspectives”.ModernLanguages Open. Wilkinson, Mark D., Michel Dumontier, IJsbrand Jan Aalbersberg, Gabrielle Appleton, MylesAxton, Arie Baak, Niklas Blomberg. 2016. „The FAIR Guiding Principles for Scientific DataManagement and Stewardship“.Scientific Data 3(1).https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18.

This is the recording and presentation ofthe next training session about the GoTriple Trust Building System (TBS) that took place on16th of March 2022.The TBS is a tool that enables you to be introduced to someone new by someone from your network and which will help you and fellow SSH researchers find reliable partners and connect with them through your peers.This training event will be devoted specifically to getting acquainted with the TBS and it will provide answers to the following questions, among others: How to create a profile How to post a request How to interact with peers (invitations, introductions, group creation) Presenters: Gaël van Weyenbergh, Maxime Bouillard (MEOH), th Moderator: Erzsébet Tóth-Czifra

Research assessment has been recognized as the Achilles heel of firmly grounding Open Science practices in research realities for a long while now. A wide range of innovative, born-digital scholarship are still invisible from formal research administration and assessment. Entering 2022, we see strong European-level policy drive and momentum to change this for the better. In this resource, we showcase 4 ways in which DARIAH supports this important endeavor. The full blog post is available here: https://dariahopen.hypotheses.org/1172 .

Part of the Bazaar, a showcase of different approaches to the mobilisation and dissemination of Open Science.

The 6.2 Deliverable presents the procedure to onboard the future GoTriple platform into the EOSC catalogue. This deliverable is supposed to guide the TRIPLE consortium in the purpose of adding a SSH discovery platform to the EOSC catalogue but it can also guide other service providers for their own purposes, especially services that are made with different components. Part 1 of this deliverable provides an overview of the GoTriple platform and the five innovative services that are integrated into it, e.g. ScaR, MEOH App, Visualisation components, Pundit, and Head Start. As those innovative services are independent tools, the perspectives, challenges and potential solutions of their onboarding into the EOSC catalogue are discussed in detail on a case-by-case basis. Part 2 contains the core information of this deliverable. First, an overview of the three main steps in the onboarding process (2.1.) provides the overall context of the task. Second, the timeline of all needed steps (already taken and planned closer to the end of the project) to define the final federation that will serve as GoTriple provider is outlined (2.2). Essentially, all project partners that are committed to continue their support of the developed service after the project will be identified as GoTriple providers in the EOSC portal, while the GoTriple discovery service will be part of the OPERAS Research Infrastructure���s catalogue. Third, the details of the resource profile that are mandatory and optional, are listed according to the set of fields in the EOSC portal. Part 3 summarises the two main steps in the roadmap for integration which are planned to take place in September 2021 and March 2023. In conclusion, the authors highlight the fact that the EOSC development is an ongoing process, and therefore, the current report reflects the procedures and planning steps that are valid at this point of time and fit the current requirements., The deliverable awaits official approval by the Project Officer. --- The TRIPLE project (https://project.gotriple.eu/), which is financed under the Horizon 2020 framework (https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/863420), under Grant Agreement No. 863420, with approx. 5.6 million Euros for a duration of 42 months (2019-2023). --- At the heart of the project is the development of the GoTriple platform (https://www.gotriple.eu/), an innovative multilingual and multicultural discovery solution.

Slides presented at the Sharing Digitally: Seminar on Digital Tools and Infrastructures seminar organized by the University of Lviv, Center for Urban History on the 29.09.2021. The presentation aims to outline discipline-specific, yet widely interoperable models of Open Science emerging from community practices of arts and humanities. It will be shown how DARIAH, a pan-European infrastructure for Arts and Humanities builds an open agenda for Arts and Humanities research that is firmly grounded in disciplinary realities. This includes: a suite of Open Science services within DARIAH (Open Science helpdesk, the OpenMethods and the DARIAH Open platforms); training and advocacy activities and also building and strengthening communities of practice, such as the DARIAH Research data management Working Group to critically assess and shape current options for opening up research workflows and to ease compliance with national, European and global research policy mandates such as Open Access or FAIR data.

The digital transformation of research opened up radically new potentials in innovation and dissemination in all scientific areas. Open Science is becoming the new normal modus operandi in them, also as increasingly central conditions of research funding. Still, in many cases, the dominant impact of STEM disciplines on the Open Science paradigm makes it uneasy for Arts and Humanities scholars to translate these values to their everyday research realities. Therefore, it is crucially important to establish a dedicated discourse and community practices around the open research culture as it makes sense in the Arts and Humanities disciplines. DARIAH is in a unique position to push forward to an open ecosystem that is organically growing out from real community practices and needs. The presentation aims to outline discipline-specific, yet widely interoperable models of Open Science emerging from community practices of arts and humanities. It will be shown how DARIAH, a pan-European infrastructure for arts and humanities builds an open agenda for arts and humanities research that is firmly grounded in disciplinary realities. This includes: Providing a strong voice for arts and humanities research communities to be heard in European and national research policy debates, with special focus on career assessment Supporting our communities in navigating themselves in this whole new world and providing Open Science advocacy to them in all career stages and levels of expertise. Making arts and humanities’ contributions to Open Scholarship more visible both inside and outside the arts and humanities research communities. Facilitating access to Cultural Heritage data Building infrastructural components that enable open research practices across arts and humanities disciplines.&nbsp

Text, techné and tenure: what remains out of scope of research evaluation in Humanities disciplines and how to change it for the better? (Slides presented at the OAI12 conference: https://oai.events/) Peer review is central scholarly practice that carries fundamental paradoxes from its inception. On the one hand, it is very difficult to open up peer review for the sake of empirical analysis, as it usually happens in closed black boxes of publishing and other gatekeeping workflows that are embedded in a myriad of disciplinary cultures, each of which comes very different, and usually competing notions of excellence. On the other hand, it is a practice that carries an enormous weight in terms of gatekeeping; shaping disciplines, publication patterns and power relations within academia. This central role of peer review alone explains why it is crucial to study to better understand situated evaluation practices, and to continually rethink them to strive for their best, and least imperfect (or reasonably imperfect) instances. How the notion of excellence and other peer review proxies are constructed and (re)negotiated in everyday practices across the SSH disciplines; who are involved in the processes and who remain out; what are the boundaries of peer review in terms of inclusiveness with content types; and how the processes are aligned or misaligned to research realities? What are the underlying reasons behind the persistence of certain proxies in the system and what are emerging trends and future innovations? To gain an in-depth understanding of these questions, as part of the H2020 project OPERAS-P, our task force collected and analysed 32 in-depth interviews with scholars about their motivations, challenges and experiences with novel practices in scholarly writing and in peer-review. The presentation will showcase the results of this study. Focus will be on the conflict between the richness of contemporary scholarship and the prestige economy that defines our current academic evaluation culture. The encoded and pseudonymized interview transcripts that form the basis of our analysis will be shared as open data in a certified data repository together with a rich documentation of the process so that our interpretations, conclusions and the resulting recommendations are clearly delineable from the rich input we had been working with and which are thus openly reusable for other purposes.

There is a growing need to establish domain-or discipline-specific approaches to research data sharing workflows. A defining feature of data and data workflows in the arts and humanities domain is their dependence on cultural heritage sources hosted and curated in museums, libraries, galleries and archives. A major difficulty when scholars interact with heritage data is that the nature of the cooperation between researchers and Cultural Heritage Institutions (henceforth CHIs) is often constrained by structural and legal challenges but even more by uncertainties as to the expectations of both parties. The Heritage Data Reuse Charter aims to address these by designing a common environment that will enable all the relevant actors to work together to connect and improve access to heritage data and make transactions related to the scholarly use of cultural heritage data more visible and transparent. As a first step, a wide range of stakeholders on the Cultural Heritage and research sector agreed upon a set of generic principles, summarized in the Mission Statement of the Charter, that can serve as a baseline governing the interactions between CHIs, researchers and data centres. This was followed by a long and thorough validation process related to these principles through surveys 1 and workshops 2. As a second step, we now put forward a questionnaire template tool that helps researchers and CHIs to translate the 6 core principles into specific research project settings. It contains questions about access to data, provenance information, preferred citation standards, hosting responsibilities etc. on the basis of which the parties can arrive at mutual reuse agreements that could serve as a starting point for a FAIR-by-construction data management, right from the project planning/application phase. The questionnaire template and the resulting mutual agreements can be flexibly applied to projects of different scale and in platform-independent ways. Institutions can embed them into their own exchange protocols while researchers can add them to their Data Management Plans. As such, they can show evidence for responsible and fair conduct of cultural heritage data, and fair (but also FAIR) research data management practices that are based on partnership with the holding institution.

Project summary The digital age offers challenges and opportunities for completing research on Europe’s multilingual and interconnected literary heritage. Even though many resources are currently available in digital libraries, a lack of standardisation hinders their access and reuse. The EU funded CLS INFRA project will help build the shared and sustainable infrastructure needed to undertake literary studies in the digital age. The project will align these diverse resources with each other, with the tools needed to interrogate them, and with a widened base of users. The resulting improvements will benefit researchers by bridging gaps between greater and lesserresourced communities in computational literary studies and beyond, ultimately offering opportunities to create new research and insight into our shared and varied European cultural heritage. Executive summary This deliverable presents the first version of Data Management Plan for the Horizon 2020 project CLS INFRA. To maximise the potential of the present document as a living and functional project management tool, the team decided to accommodate to this present DMP all sorts of digital scholarly objects that qualify as data or software and that are deemed worthy to be captured and preserved for reuse. Following the Horizon 2020 Data Management Plan template and guidelines, the document first defines the scope and selection criteria for project outputs (1.1.) and provides a structured overview of data and software collected, created, and (re)used for and by the CLS INFRA project. The second, FAIR data chapter describes the provisions made or envisioned to accommodate the FAIR principles and thereby future usage of CLS INFRA data resources. The third chapter provides a similar FAIR assessment of software resources. The fourth chapter describes roles, responsibilities and practical commitments and safeguards that are in place for the successful implementation of the DMP. The fifth chapter covers data security aspects. In the final chapter, we accommodated discussions around ethical aspects such as safeguards for personal data handling and safeguards for adherence to intellectual property rights are discussed. While preparing the DMP, special attention has been given to domain and disciplinary specificities. The CLS INFRA Data Management Plan is a living document and shall be updated continuously throughout the project in line with the new information gathered via conducting the project activities

This report discusses the scholarly communication issues in Social Sciences and Humanities that are relevant to the future development and functioning of OPERAS. The outcomes collected here can be divided into two groups of innovations regarding 1) the operation of OPERAS, and 2) its activities. The “operational” issues include the ways in which an innovative research infrastructure should be governed (Chapter 1) as well as the business models for open access publications in Social Sciences and Humanities (Chapter 2). The other group of issues is dedicated to strategic areas where OPERAS and its servicesmay play an instrumental role in providing, enabling, or unlocking innovation: FAIR data (Chapter 3), bibliodiversity and multilingualism in scholarly communication (Chapter 4), the future of scholarly writing (Chapter 5), and quality assessment (Chapter 6). Each chapter provides an overview of the main findings and challenges with emphasis on recommendations for OPERAS and other stakeholders like e-infrastructures, publishers, SSH researchers, research performing organisations, policy makers, and funders. Links to data and further publications stemming from work concerning particular tasks are located at the end of each chapter.

This report aims to present the result of the work conducted in task 6.6 (Quality assessment of SSH research: innovations and challenges) of the OPERAS-P (Open Scholarly Communication in the European Research Area for Social Sciences and Humanities – Preparation) project. Our task aimed to better understand the ways in which peer review works in actual SSH practices. In the present report, we analyse key aspects of peer review that normally remain hidden from analysis. This work supports the development of the relevant OPERAS activities and services by informing them about current trends, gaps and community needs in research evaluation. This entails 1. teasing out the underlying reasons behind the persistence of certain proxies in the system (such as the 'impact factors of the mind' that continue to assign tacit prestige to certain publishers and forms of scholarship) and 2. the analysis of emerging trends and future innovation in peer review activities within the Humanities domain. This comprises two areas: innovation in peer review workflows (different flavours of openness, novel practices and tools) and the peer review of digital scholarly objects (such as digital critical editions, data, software etc.). A visual summary of the study can be found here: Tóth-Czifra, Erzsébet. (2021, March). Quality assessment of SSH research: innovations and challenges – workshop slides. Zenodo:.&nbsp

DARIAH’s Open Science activities explore and foster domain-specific pathways to the open research culture. This includes promoting innovation through new networks and collaborations; supporting uptake of new research and publication practices through reflection, creation and diffusion of high-quality new knowledge, skills and technologies as well as building infrastructural enablers of open research practices. The impact of these activities primarily manifest itself in changes in research culture; in changes in the EU research policy and it also enables the DARIAH member countries to collectively attract funding through European partnerships to address the gaps in the Open Science landscape together.

The 'Quality assessment of SSH research: innovations and challenges (T 6.6.)' task force aims to support the development of the relevant OPERAS activities and services by informing them about current trends, gaps and community needs in research evaluation. This entails 1. teasing out the underlying reasons behind the persistence of certain proxies in the system (such as the ‘impact factors of the mind’ that continue to assign tacit prestige to certain publishers and forms of scholarship) and 2. the analysis of emerging trends and future innovation in peer review activities within the Humanities domain. This comprises two areas: innovation in peer review workflows (different flavours of openness, novel practices and tools) and the peer review of digital scholarly objects (such as digital critical editions, data, software etc.). The slide deck below had been presented and discussed during ' The Future of Scholarly Communication – OPERAS-P Workshop' taking place online 24–26 February 2021. You can find more details about the workshop here: https://operas.hypotheses.org/4512

How does technology impact research practices in the humanities? How does digitisation shape scholarly identity? How do we negotiate trust in the digital realm? What is scholarship, what forms can it take, and how does it acquire authority? This diverse set of essays demonstrate the importance of asking such questions, bringing together established and emerging scholars from a variety of disciplines, at a time when data is increasingly being incorporated as an input and output in humanities sources and publications. Major themes addressed include the changing nature of scholarly publishing in a digital age, the different kinds of ‘gate-keepers’ for scholarship, and the difficulties of effectively assessing the impact of digital resources. The essays bring theoretical and practical perspectives into conversation, offering readers not only comprehensive examinations of past and present discourse on digital scholarship, but tightly-focused case studies. This timely volume illuminates the different forces underlying the shifting practices in humanities research today, with especial focus on how humanists take ownership of, and are empowered by, technology in unexpected ways. Digital Technology and the Practices of Humanities Research is essential reading for scholars, students, and general readers interested in the changing culture of research practices in the humanities, and in the future of the digital humanities on the whole.

Realising the Promises of FAIR within Discipline-Specific Scholarly Practices Since their inception in 2014, the FAIR principles (findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability) have come a long way in serving the global need for generic guidelines for data management and stewardship. Addressing one of the grand challenges of scientific innovation, namely the need for infrastructure that supports the reuse of scholarly data, the FAIR principles have become increasingly influent...

This report discusses the scholarly communication issues in Social Sciences and Humanities that are relevant to the future development and functioning of OPERAS. The outcomes collected here can be divided into two groups of innovations regarding 1) the operation of OPERAS, and 2) its activities. The “operational” issues include the ways in which an innovative research infrastructure should be governed (Chapter 1) as well as the business models for open access publications in Social Sciences and Humanities (Chapter 2). The other group of issues is dedicated to strategic areas where OPERAS and its services may play an instrumental role in providing, enabling, or unlocking innovation: FAIR data (Chapter 3), bibliodiversity and multilingualism in scholarly communication (Chapter 4), the future of scholarly writing (Chapter 5), and quality assessment (Chapter 6). Each chapter provides an overview of the main findings and challenges with emphasis on recommendations for OPERAS and other stakeholders like e-infrastructures, publishers, SSH researchers, research performing organisations, policy makers, and funders. Links to data and further publications stemming from work concerning particular tasks are located at the end of each chapter.

Povelja između baštinskih ustanova i znanstvenika sa smjernicama za uzajamne sporazume o ponovnoj uporabi podataka o kulturnoj baštini u fazi planiranja projekta, koja utvrđuje šest osnovnih načela za poboljšanje korištenja i ponovne uporabe resursa kulturne baštine od strane istraživača te za pomoć svim relevantnim akterima u zajedničkoj namjeri da povežu i poboljšaju pristup podatcima o baštini.

See the abstract here: https://f.hypotheses.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/1044/files/2020/02/Rethinking-text-techné-and-tenure-VREs-as-an-evaluation-and-peer-review-challenge-in-Humanities.pdf

In this resource, you can follow a step-by-step description of a research data workflow involving the annotation of multilingual parliamentary corpora (French, German, British) according to the guidelines of the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI). Read further if you are interested in working with the TEI, analyzing parliamentary corpora, or simply would like to see a validated example of how FAIR and open data is implemented in the context of a PhD dissertation in Corpus Linguistics.

In this resource, you can follow a step-by-step description of a research data workflow involving the annotation of multilingual parliamentary corpora (French, German, British) according to the guidelines of the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI). Read further if you are interested in working with the TEI, analyzing parliamentary corpora, or simply would like to see a validated example of how FAIR and open data is implemented in the context of a PhD dissertation in Corpus Linguistics.

In recent years, FAIR principles have come a long way to serve the global need for generic guidelines governing data management and stewardship. Considering their wide embrace and the support received from governments, policy-makers, governing bodies and funding bodies, FAIR principles have all the potential to have a huge impact on the future landscape of knowledge creation for the better. This opportunity, however, may easily be missed if the specific dynamics of scientific production are not addressed in its disciplinary implementation plans. With the goal of making FAIR meaningful and helping to realise its promises in an arts and humanities context, this paper describes some of the defining aspects underlying the domain-specific epistemic processes that pose hidden or visible challenges in the FAIRification of knowledge creation in Arts and Humanities. By applying the FAIR data guiding principles to arts and humanities data curation workflows, we will show that contrary to their general scope and deliberately domain-independent nature, they have been implicitly designed along underlying assumptions about how knowledge creation operates and communicates. These are: 1. scholarly data or metadata is digital by nature, 2. scholarly data is always created and therefore owned by researchers, and 3. there is a wide community-level agreement on what can be considered scholarly data. The problems around such assumptions in arts and humanities are cornerstones in reconciling disciplinary traditions with the productive implementation of FAIR data management. By addressing them one by one, we aim to contribute to the better understanding of discipline-specific needs and challenges in data production, discovery and reuse. Based on these considerations, we make recommendations that may facilitate the inclusive and optimal implementation of the high-level principles that serve the flourishing of the arts and humanities disciplines rather than imposing limitations on its epistemic practices.