Search results

Cultural heritage archiving is experiencing an increase in digitalisations of artefacts in the last 15 years. The reason behind this trend is a demand for providing information about the artefact in a more accessible way to the audience, for example, through online delivery or virtual reality. Other reasons might be to simplify and automate the management of artefacts. Having a ‘digital copy’ of artefacts, allows one to search an archive and plan its storage and dissemination in a comprehensive manner. With the increased digitalisation comes an increased use of artificial intelligence [AI] applications. AI can be very beneficial in classifying artefacts automatically through machine learning [ML] and natural language processing [NLP]. For example, an algorithm can identify the source and age of artefacts based on an image and can do this much faster for a large collection of photos than a human. Although AI provides many benefits, it also presents challenges: Sophisticated AI techniques require certain insights on how they work, need specialists to customise a solution, and require an existing large dataset to train an algorithm. Another challenge is that typical AI techniques are regarded as black boxes, which means they decide, but it is not obvious why a decision has been made. This chapter describes a project in collaboration with the South Australian Museum [SAM] on the application of AI to extract material lists from a description of artefacts. A large dataset to train an algorithm did not exist, and hence, a customised approach was required. The outcome of the project was the application of NLP in combination with easy-to-customise rules that can be applied by non-IT specialists. The resulting prototype achieved the extraction of materials from a large list of artefacts within seconds and a flexible solution that can be applied on other collections in the future.

Purpose: With this study, the authors aim to highlight the application of machine learning in smart appliances used in our day-to-day activities. This chapter focuses on analysing intelligent devices used in our daily lives to examine various machine learning models that can be applied to make an appliance ‘intelligent’ and discuss the different pros and cons of the implementation.

Methodology: Most smart appliances need machine learning models to decrypt the meaning and functioning behind the sensor’s data to execute accurate predictions and come to appropriate conclusions.

Findings: The future holds endless possibilities for devices to be connected in different ways, and these devices will be in our homes, offices, industries and even vehicles that can connect each other. The massive number of connected devices could congest the network; hence there is necessary to incorporate intelligence on end devices using machine learning algorithms. The connected devices that allow automatic control appliance driven by the user’s preference would avail itself to use the Network to communicate with devices close to its proximity or use other channels to liaise with external utility systems. Data processing is facilitated through edge devices, and machine learning algorithms can be applied.

Significance: This chapter overviews smart appliances that use machine learning at the edge. It highlights the effects of using these appliances and how they raise the overall living standards when smarter cities are introduced by integrating such devices.

Social movement scholars use protest events as a way to quantify social movements and have most often used large, national newspapers to identify those events. This has introduced known and unknown biases into our measurement of social movements. We know that national newspapers tend to cover larger and more contentious events and organizations. Protest events are furthermore a small part of what social movements actually do. Without other readily available options to quantify social movements, however, big-N studies have continued to focus on protest events via a few large newspapers. With advances in digitized data and computational methods, we now no longer have to rely on large newspapers or focus only on protests to quantify important aspects of social movements. In this paper, we use the environmental movement as a case study, analyzing data from a wide range of local, regional, and national newspapers in the United States to quantify multiple facets of social movements. We argue that the incorporation of more data and new methods to quantify information in text has the potential to transform the way we both conceive of and measure social movements in three ways: (1) the type of focal social movement organization included, (2) the type of tactics and issues covered, and (3) the ability to go beyond protest events as the primary unit of analysis. In addition to demonstrating ways that the focus on counting protest events has introduced specific biases in the type of tactics, issues, and organizations covered in social movement research, we argue that computational methods can help us extract and count meaningful aspects of social movements well beyond event counts. In short, the infusion of new data and methods into social movements, peace, and conflict studies could lead us to a substantial shift in the way we quantify social movements, from protest events to everything that occurs outside of them.