scholarly journals Taking Our Space: Service, Scholarship, and Radical Citation Practice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Priya Baskaran
Keyword(s):  
2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 687-694 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jens Frankenreiter

During the last decades, social network analysis has been established as a key technique in a number of disciplines in social science. Its main promise is that it provides tools for researchers to take into account the social context of individual entities or actors. Legal scholars, by contrast, have only recently started to make use of these tools. Nowadays, one particularly prominent application is the use of network analysis to analyze the citation networks of different national and international courts. The contribution by Derlén and Lindholm published in this issue of theGerman Law Journalforms part of this trend. It is the latest in a series of papers studying citations in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Unlike the authors' previous contributions, the paper specifically addresses the use of precedent by the CJEU and assesses the merits of criticism in the literature arguing that the citation practice of the CJEU lacks an acceptable method. The paper provides novel insights into the use of precedent by the CJEU and thus makes an interesting contribution to the emerging scholarship investigating the decision-making of the CJEU by means of quantitative analysis. At the same time, the design of the research raises severe doubts about whether the authors succeed in providing a conclusive response to the critics of the CJEU's citation practice.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-46
Author(s):  
Aja Martinez

This counterstory reviews central topics of mentorship and writing/publishing collaborations as parable. While maintaining pressure on the audience to read/see themselves in the fictional characters within, this counterstory as parable expands the voice, style, citation practice, and genre possibilities for discussions that are difficult to engage due to power imbalances and precarity within the profession for graduate students and junior professors. This counterstory as parable is an invitation to discuss the important topics of mentorship and writing/publishing, particularly for audience members who maintain the power and privilege of working with emerging scholars (i.e. graduate program professors and senior scholars).


Author(s):  
Tim Robertson ◽  
Serge Belongie ◽  
Hartwig Adam ◽  
Christine Kaeser-Chen ◽  
Chenyang Zhang ◽  
...  

Advances in machine vision technology are rapidly enabling new and innovative uses within the field of biodiversity. Computers are now able to use images to identify tens of thousands of species across a wide range of taxonomic groups in real time, notably demonstrated by iNaturalist.org, which suggests species IDs to users (https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/computer_vision_demo) as they create observation records. Soon it will be commonplace to detect species in video feeds or use the camera in a mobile device to search for species-related content on the Internet. The Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) has an important role to play in advancing and improving this technology, whether in terms of data, collaboration across teams, or citation practice. But in the short term, the most important role may relate to initiating a cultural shift in accepted practices for the use of GBIF-mediated data for training of artificial intelligence (AI). “Training datasets” play a critical role in achieving species recognition capability in any machine vision system. These datasets compile representative images containing the explicit, verifiable identifications of the species they include. High-powered computers run algorithms on these training datasets, analysing the imagery and building complex models that characterize defining features for each species or taxonomic group. Researchers can, in turn, apply the resulting models to new images, determining what species or group they likely contain. Current research in machine vision is exploring (a) the use of location and date information to further improve model results, (b) identification methods beyond species-level into attribute, character, trait, or part-level ID, with an eye toward human interpretability, and (c) expertise modeling for improved determination of “research grade” images and metadata. The GBIF community has amassed one of the largest datasets of labelled species images available on the internet: more than 33 million species occurrence records in GBIF.org have one or more images (https://www.gbif.org/occurrence/gallery). Machine vision models, when integrated into the data collection tools in use across the GBIF network, can improve the user experience. For example, in citizen science applications like iNaturalist, automated species suggestion helps even novice users contribute occurrence records to GBIF. Perhaps most importantly, GBIF has implemented uniform (and open) data licensing, established guidelines on citation and provided consistent methods for tracking data use through the Digital Object Identifiers (DOI) citation chain. GBIF would like to build on the lessons learned in these activities while striving to assist with this technology research and increase its power and availability. We envisage an approach as follows: To assist in developing and refining machine vision models, GBIF plans to provide training datasets, taking effort to ensure license and citation practice are respected. The training datasets will be issued with a DOI, and the contributing datasets will be linked through the DOI citation graph. To assist application developers, Google and Visipedia plan to build and publish openly-licensed models and tutorials for how to adapt them for localized use. Together we will strive to ensure that data is being used responsibly and transparently, to close the gap between machine vision scientists, application developers, and users and to share taxonomic trees capturing the taxon rank to which machine vision models can identify with confidence based on an image’s visual characteristics. To assist in developing and refining machine vision models, GBIF plans to provide training datasets, taking effort to ensure license and citation practice are respected. The training datasets will be issued with a DOI, and the contributing datasets will be linked through the DOI citation graph. To assist application developers, Google and Visipedia plan to build and publish openly-licensed models and tutorials for how to adapt them for localized use. Together we will strive to ensure that data is being used responsibly and transparently, to close the gap between machine vision scientists, application developers, and users and to share taxonomic trees capturing the taxon rank to which machine vision models can identify with confidence based on an image’s visual characteristics.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell Smyth

This article examines the citation practice of the New South Wales District Court, using all decisions reported on AustLII/Caselaw NSW decided between 2005 and 2016. This study is the first to examine the citation practice of an ‘inferior’ trial court. The study suggests some important differences between the citation practice of the New South Wales District Court and what existing studies have found about the citation practice of superior courts in Australia. The proportion of citations to decisions of the High Court and New South Wales Court of Appeal is higher than in the superior courts. The proportion of citations to the Court’s own previous decisions are lower than in the superior courts. The proportion of coordinate citations to courts in other states at the same level in the judicial hierarchy are extremely small. The Court cites fewer secondary sources than is the case in the appellate courts.


Author(s):  
Sarah J. K. Pearce

This chapter deals with the fundamental place of the LXX in the writings of Philo of Alexandria, with particular attention to the treatment of the LXX text in the following: (1) the Questions and Answers on Genesis and Exodus; (2) the Allegorical Commentary; (3) the Exposition of the Law; (4) the Life of Moses Books 1–2. It also discusses questions of Philo’s citation practice; terminology applied to Jewish sacred books; the transmission history of Philo’s scriptural citations; his presentation of the translation of the books of Moses on the island of Pharos (Mos. 2.25–44); his use of etymologies; and his knowledge of Hebrew.


Ethology ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 115 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Taborsky
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (7) ◽  
pp. 761-775 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jian Qu

Abstract Trust law was transplanted into China nearly two decades ago, but how has it been applied by the Chinese courts? The answer may be found in relevant judgments. This study collected accessible Chinese court decisions related to trusts, and, relying on this, the citation practice of Trust Law in courts can be analyzed chronologically, and intensively applied articles can be singled out. Thus, this study intends to use these judicial documents, as data and as individual cases, to examine the role that the Chinese Trust Law has played in the judicial field since its enactment in 2001.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document