Archaeological Information in the Digital Society - The Conference 2016

There are many challenges pertaining to the making, documentation, management, use and theorising of digital archaeological information. ARKDIS-project organised a two conference in Uppsala June 30-July, 2016 on archaeological information in the digital society. The conference was at the same time the third Centre for Digital Heritage annual meeting and gathered an engaged group of 40 participants from around the world to discuss different aspects of archaeological information and digital heritage. Conference featured four keynotes by Dr. Michael Olsson (UTS), Dr. Åsa Berggren (Sydsvensk arkeologi), Dr. Kari Uotila (Muuritutkimus) and Prof. Julian Richards (University of York) and two full days of presentations from heritage scholars and specialists. The conference was concluded by a field trip to Gamla Uppsala on July 2.

The programme of the conference and the ARKDIS conference webpage are online to consult together with a probably somewhat non-exhaustive log of tweets (without retweets) from the conference.

Date	Tweet	Tweeter
6/30/2016 0:00:09	Conference website and programme here https://t.co/GnDqW8q5Uy Today l relax. Tomorrow I speak! #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 0:39:13	.@ihuvila giving opening address and background to conference #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 0:48:38	First up - Keynote by Michael Olsson (Sydney) on field arch as embodied social practice https://t.co/bfZUfAnCfS #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 0:57:15	Olsson looking at archaeologists as community. Acad vs field practice, theory vs practice #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 0:58:54	Most knowledge needed by archs is invisible in literature. Tacit and implicit #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 0:59:51	Olsson: ‘information has a role in defining who we are’ #arkdis16	Gary Brannan
6/30/2016 1:00:08	Olsson: passion to which archaeologists hold to their identity disappears in the published literature #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 1:02:10	Olsson: Never ask an English and a Scottish archaeologist to define Iron Age in same conversation #ARKDIS16 - metaphor for #brexit outcome?	Julian D Richards
6/30/2016 1:03:15	Olsson: used ethnographic approach on site, but never pretended he was't there! #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 1:06:06	Interesting potential comparison here about the decisions taken in archaeological finds and appraisal #arkdis16	Gary Brannan
6/30/2016 1:06:12	Olsson: key moment in arch practice is whether something goes in the finds tray or on the spot heap! #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 1:07:53	Olsson: objects can be documents too and so this decision point is crucial #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 1:11:54	Olsson: decisions are invested in expertise of team members - but this is not 'documented' in the traditional sense #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 1:16:09	Olsson: haptic (hands on) analysis important eg. Knowing a tool from picking it up #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 1:17:17	Some of this reminds me of this article about excavation photography https://t.co/butDvceo5w #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 1:25:24	Olsson: archaeology as apprenticeship. An Internalised socialised discipline #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 1:28:49	Olsson: investigated why everyone still draws. It's about 'knowing your trench'. A cognitive socio practice #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 1:33:03	Interesting similarity: archaeology and influence and excitement of Time Team and archives and WDYTYA. #arkdis16	Gary Brannan
6/30/2016 1:33:38	Olsson: analysing how sites are represent. Passion and excitement of arch is stripped from formal reports #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 1:34:04	Olsson: "We are missing portals that unite these different stories" that link the research and the stories #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 2:06:39	Now @nicolo_dellunto on 3D simulation platforms and arch interpretation #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 2:09:28	Dell'Unto: overproduction of 3D data, but has it changed #archaeology #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
6/30/2016 2:12:09	.@nicolo_dellunto 3D models. Great for presentation but less the research tool they were lauded to be #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 2:18:49	.@nicolo_dellunto reflexive on site usage of 3D models at Çatalhöyük #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 2:24:54	Great example by @nicolo_dellunto of usefulness of 3D model on site to retrieve info from previous season to aid interpretation #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 2:30:43	.@nicolo_dellunto Volumetrics is the next challenge for 3D archaeology - and also the relationship with density of finds? #ARKDIS16	Julian D Richards
6/30/2016 2:35:24	Marta Bura, UniWarsaw on digitisation of the pyramid of Fahrenheid, Poland #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
6/30/2016 2:35:55	Next up Marta Bura (Warsaw) on Digital Pyramid of Fahrenheid #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 2:39:15	Bura: pyramid is a family mausoleum in NE Poland. Team used laser scanning and other non-invasive techniques to study structure #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 2:39:26	ARKDIS始まりました。まずはOlsson先生の考古学研究者の研究。発掘調査者への民族学的な調査、報告書と他媒体(TimeTeam!)、徒弟制的な技術修得、何故記録をするのかの分析など。面白い。#arkdis16 https://t.co/Q7zVE9ZW36	あかねだ
6/30/2016 2:48:47	続いてDell'Untoさんの発表に圧倒されたなう。SfMからのデータを現場でタブレット使って図面を作成。なんだこれどうやるんだ!? #arkdis16	あかねだ
6/30/2016 3:02:42	3D scan lab is on Facebook at https://t.co/QJcOa6qizx #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 4:00:55	お次はGPRネタ入りですよ。ワクワク。 #arkdis16 https://t.co/z5XEcGKbEg	あかねだ
6/30/2016 4:03:06	Now it's @UllaMR on Stockholm Volterra project https://t.co/cKHHkCYusk #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 4:25:53	Plans to use 3D hop (as used by IA and ADS) to present models online @3DHOP #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 4:31:26	@gbrannanarchive @UoYBorthwick introducing Archbishop's Registers project - another @cdhyork partner #ARKDIS16	Julian D Richards
6/30/2016 4:33:26	Now it's York colleague @gbrannanarchive on digitising the registers of the Archbishops of York https://t.co/Z4ZvD5vZhh #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 4:35:34	Search the archive here! Huge amount of work https://t.co/4a3EIHYnc6 #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 4:37:54	Project using IIIF https://t.co/YIqdPMFgQb for deep zooming of images #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 4:39:09	Darn @gbrannanarchive I missed that great mountain / indexer quote. Can you repeat?! :-) #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 4:57:28	Brannan: Registers also contain huge amount of info for many disciplines as well as archaeologists and historians/genealogists #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 4:57:46	RT @IntarchEditor: Search the archive here! Huge amount of work https://t.co/4a3EIHYnc6 #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
6/30/2016 5:02:15	@gbrannanarchive Balancing btw finding a #crowd & keeping hi scholarly qual in digirepo w handwritten materials req spec skills #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
6/30/2016 5:03:19	Now Sander Munster (Dresden) on building a wiki resource on visual research methodologies in visual humanities #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 5:12:38	Sander Münster w a more practical exercise on data gathering for a wiki resource #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
6/30/2016 5:58:19	Beautiful fossils in the steps at the Geijersalen @uppsalauni #arkdis16 https://t.co/KZqoXyTTus	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 6:02:11	Now up Maureen Hennininger (Sydney) on metadata challenges for archaeological repositories and museums #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 6:03:27	.@maureenh1 talking about metadata challenges for repositories #arkdis16 - based on Ness of Brodgar case studies - NLP of dig diaries	Julian D Richards
6/30/2016 6:03:46	Hennininger: carried out NLP on dig diaries on Mud to Museum project #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 6:08:34	@maureenh1 talks about the metadata challenges for archaeology #arkdis16 #fassuts #fass https://t.co/cVuJT5yLSg	Michael Olsson
6/30/2016 6:13:15	Henninger: fieldwork recording terms discovered to be problematic for subsequent use e.g repositories #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 6:14:12	Henninger: how much use of ontologies actually happens on site? #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 6:18:38	Henninger: now referencing metadata standards as used by STELLAR and STAR projects @ADS_Update and @OpenContext #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 6:18:39	.@maureenh1 References @ADS_Update / USW Seneschal and Stellar projects #ARKDIS16	Julian D Richards
6/30/2016 6:28:28	Maureen Henninger: job of information manager is to say "yes, but..." when working with professionals #arkdis16 #informationmanagemnt #km	Isto Huvila
6/30/2016 6:30:00	Henninger: urges document specialists/ info manager as one of the team of specialists on site. But lack of resources an issue #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 6:31:14	Now Carlotta Capurro/Anders Hast on the role of the curator of digital assets in designing digital strategies #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 6:32:02	Charlotte Capurro & Anders Hast on digital curatorship #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
6/30/2016 6:32:10	#arkdis16 https://t.co/kRowiMjgKw	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 6:34:16	Capurro: highlights the specialist knowledge required of digital curators. So, be grateful for @ADS_Update everybody (my words!) #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 6:39:55	Capurro: many of those sharing data on Europeana does not point their users to it from their websites!#arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 6:42:58	Capurro: calls for more active presence on sharing platforms by institutions #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 7:00:40	Ulf Jakobsson (SNDS) introducing @Ariadne_Network portal #ARKDIS16	Julian D Richards
6/30/2016 7:01:10	Last speaker today Ulf Jakobsson from the Swedish National Data Service on the great work of @Ariadne_Network #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 7:02:44	Visit the portal here: https://t.co/BnMRho8ydc #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 7:02:48	Ulf Jakobsson from SND talks about Ariadne portal @Ariadne_Network at #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
6/30/2016 7:07:24	Will be open for additional content from December 2016 #ARKDIS16 https://t.co/w9ozeiYp4D	Julian D Richards
6/30/2016 7:07:30	Internet Archaeology content is in there #GottaLoveMetadata #arkdis16 :-) https://t.co/AEOywcGoOo	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 7:24:41	Gotta say, archaeologists are way ahead of us in terms of standards and open/linked data. #arkdis16	Gary Brannan
6/30/2016 7:40:59	Final keynote speaker today: Asa Berggren on documentation and interpretation at Çatalhöyük #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 8:01:47	Berggren: methods since 2012 seen shift to digital #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 8:09:15	Berggren: Scalelessness of digital recording creates a different sense of space #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 8:10:44	Berggren: Tablets have changed practice. Direct digital recording using onsite intranet #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
6/30/2016 8:13:22	Berggren: biggest change was move to tasks previously done in lab to being carried out onsite #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 0:25:07	#arkdis16 day 2 soon to start. 1st keynote is Kari Uotila on Finnish digital archaeology 1995-2015	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 0:36:59	Second day of #arkdis16 starts with a keynote by Kari Uotila, Finland https://t.co/yc8sgxYr4U	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 0:39:53	Insights into development of contract archaeology in Finland from Kari Uotila. Buildings archaeology better integrated than in UK #ARKDIS16	Julian D Richards
7/1/2016 0:47:02	RT @Julian62523002: Insights into development of contract archaeology in Finland from Kari Uotila. Buildings archaeology better integrated…	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 0:47:23	Uotila: laser scanning replacing drawing. Challenges yesterday's point where only thro' drawing do you know your trench #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 0:48:31	We’re back here at #arkdis16. Quite an archaeology-heavy presentation first up but if we get anything you guys might be interest will tweet	Gary Brannan
7/1/2016 1:31:36	Next speaker Bodil Petersson on Digitally Enhanced Museum Communication #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 1:34:27	Bodil Petersson talks about Digitally enhanced museum communication #arkdis16 https://t.co/mgZRY79t4h	Michael Olsson
7/1/2016 1:35:39	Petersson is studying presentation and display in museums. Does digital change the stories we tell about the past? #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 1:44:44	Petersson: one exhibition combined art & archaeology. The body and the senses activated. Digital data derived from arch doc #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 1:46:37	Bodil Petersson talks embodiment in the museum! #arkdis16 https://t.co/3C9ilUQQRi	Michael Olsson
7/1/2016 1:47:57	Petersson: exhibition at Österlens museum combined art & archaeology, bodily experiences #arkdis16 https://t.co/4VqjLrUV9f	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 1:49:22	Petersson: Moesgaard Museum emphasis on animations AND artefacts, combatting problem of digital sometimes overshadowing finds #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 1:51:15	Virtual tactility in the museum! #arkdis16 https://t.co/MM3mt41ku0	Michael Olsson
7/1/2016 1:51:40	#arkdis16 https://t.co/LQM4LikVvV	Gary Brannan
7/1/2016 1:52:02	Petersson: #participation not #interaction at @MuseumMoesgaard #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 1:55:34	Petersson: "not so much blood" in the Medieval massacre exhibition of the Swedish History Museum #arkdis16 https://t.co/wD5Ux19yPk	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 1:56:02	Petersson: development of displays have moved from objects to storytelling, but real interactivity still lacking. #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 1:56:30	RT @IntarchEditor: Petersson: development of displays have moved from objects to storytelling, but real interactivity still lacking. #arkdi…	Michael Olsson
7/1/2016 1:57:23	Petersson: #interactivity in #museum #arkdis16 https://t.co/VGL8FGAD1i	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 1:57:42	Petersson: new digital museum landscape is personalised but not interactive #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 2:05:09	How do you define interactivity. Is it an individual competing tasks or something more inclusive? #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 2:06:48	Now Duncan Hay (UCL) on Writing East London's Histories - using interactive map #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 2:06:54	@MichaelOlsson7 calls for a broader def of #interaction in #museum contexts than one pertaining to individuals/tasks cf #LIS #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 2:16:39	Find out more about the project here https://t.co/JRyUXyCvzj #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 2:23:10	Nice split between tabs for ‘research’ and ‘memories’ - can signpost to source, maybe reliability? #arkdis16	Gary Brannan
7/1/2016 2:27:23	#arkdis16 https://t.co/6GZub4XyGj	Gary Brannan
7/1/2016 2:32:55	Next Daniel Lowenborg on Augmented History in Gamla Uppsala. Launching soon! See https://t.co/dLBobL5ZOw #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 2:37:43	Daniel Löwenborg https://t.co/dbojTF0b3q on augmented history in Gamla Uppsala #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 2:41:34	Found this last night and, gotta say, I’m a bit obsessed with this now https://t.co/i5a731IHP2 #arkdis16	Gary Brannan
7/1/2016 2:42:37	Use of games designer in making interpretive reconstructions. Which is a good idea as damn, they look good and in grammar of users #arkdis16	Gary Brannan
7/1/2016 2:51:28	Here's the example we were just shown - looks so much better with people in #arkdis16 https://t.co/EuTU7f4J4X	Gary Brannan
7/1/2016 4:27:32	Now Goran Gruber on Contract archaeology and social media. Tweets will then diminish as it'll be me after that! #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 4:35:17	GGruber: Swedish development-led archaeology is supposed to become more communicative according to national guidelines #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 4:42:04	Gruber: Motala project is on Facebook here https://t.co/kfq4hHrKF6 #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 4:48:08	Gruber: joke about find became big news. Loss of control of archaeological narrative #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 4:50:28	But seriously, kids #arkdis16 https://t.co/IN6sIAyfoZ	Gary Brannan
7/1/2016 4:52:24	Gruber: social media highlights questions of how narratives are created and how past is used in meaningful ways #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 4:56:24	More about #participation & #archaeology by Arnberg & Gruber in https://t.co/ZO9cSsuk3K #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 5:00:41	At #ARKDIS16 https://t.co/7R5o9RrAE1	Julian D Richards
7/1/2016 5:01:33	Now @IntarchEditor on Internet Archaeology #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 5:18:05	Internet Archaeology has combined diff funding models and moved from being project funded to subscriptions, hybrid and APC funded #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 5:20:25	@IntarchEditor doubts whether all niche journals have a sustainable infrastructure and urges to use Internet Arch which has it! #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 5:28:00	@IntarchEditor at #arkdis16 : what Internet Archaeology is all about https://t.co/sw0LsM3mpA	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 6:05:04	Last session now and its the lovely Bodil Petersson on digital do-production #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 6:15:20	Firat Monty Python reference of #arkdis16 by Bodil Petersson	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 6:20:14	Petersson: Time Machine app. Production process itself creates situations of reflection and evaluation #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 6:24:54	Now it's @GCBeale from @cdhyork on rethinking arch approaches to adoption of VR #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 6:25:41	.@GCBeale (with @DrPaulReilly) on After Virtual Archaeology #arkdis16	Julian D Richards
7/1/2016 6:26:40	Gareth Beale on rethinking technological adoption in archaeoloy. #arkdis16 https://t.co/YVIkE4RmGW	Michael Olsson
7/1/2016 6:28:40	Beale: 'virtual archaeology' originally used to refer to emerging technologies such as 3D computer graphics #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 6:32:40	Beale: interested in how tech has worked its way into our practice and how it's used. #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 6:35:49	@GCBeale talks about the communities of practice that have emerged around technologies in archaeology. #arkdis16	Michael Olsson
7/1/2016 6:36:02	Beale: computational p'graphy is one area where arch has contributed to technology i.e. Tool actually designed with archs in mind #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 6:41:13	Beale: technology is no longer the preserve of experts #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 6:45:21	GBeale: Instead of a return to #virtualarchaeology we need continued vigilance & interest in exploiting new technologies for arch #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 6:46:01	Now Walter Laan on Dealing with digital dependency #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 6:49:35	Laan: talking about the thing we ALL need to talk about... when services break and go wrong! #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 6:56:04	Laan: ARCHIS written into documentation workflows but upgrade to system failed #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 6:59:45	Laan: 1 year on, some functionality working but lots still to do. #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:03:12	Lessons here now on database failure: don’t assume your database and provider are too big to fail… #arkdis16	Gary Brannan
7/1/2016 7:05:56	#arkdis16 https://t.co/W5TlFJ4UiN	Gary Brannan
7/1/2016 7:06:29	RT @gbrannanarchive: #arkdis16 https://t.co/W5TlFJ4UiN	Stefanie Archivist
7/1/2016 7:10:58	#arkdis16 Re: system design https://t.co/jT25C586Bc	Gary Brannan
7/1/2016 7:13:44	Laan: Increasing digital integration means increasing dependency. A warning tale #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:33:40	Take digital curation and preservation seriously in all your projects! #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:33:50	Last keynote by @Julian62523002 talking about 20 years of archiving @ADS_Update and publication @IntarchEditor #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:36:22	Richards: Brexit marks a huge shift for all of us #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:37:20	Richards: archaeology benefited hugely from euro collaboration #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:39:23	Richards: digital archaeology has to be European. Big questions do not respect modern political boundaries #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:40:33	Richards: we will always need cross border agreements on standards & learn from our shared successes and mistakes #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:42:20	Richards: @ADS_Update holds 2m files and carried out 18000 processes on those files #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:46:36	Richards: what is an adequate digital archive? Many in community still not grappling with archiving #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:50:29	Richards: digital changing the way we do the discipline. The archive is not separate from the publication #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:53:01	Richards: highlighting one thing I forgot to mention!Data papers #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:55:08	@Julian62523002 reminds that data collection is expensive! Reason to reuse. But preservation costs, too #arkdis16	Isto Huvila
7/1/2016 7:56:09	Amirite, kids? Neat idea though. #arkdis16 https://t.co/a35RMD8mYv	Gary Brannan
7/1/2016 7:57:25	Richards: biggest battle is to persuade colleagues to archive and to factor in funds for its preservation properly #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 7:58:45	Richards: research funders also need to have strength to stand up to non-deposition and refuse further funds (stick vs carrot) #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 8:00:27	Richards: there is an economic and a research value of digital archiving #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 8:01:29	Richards: key lesson is that it's easier to work in partnership rather than in isolation and it feeds back to our work #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 8:02:57	Richards: at least David Cameron signed UK up to G8 open data charter ! #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 8:04:26	Richards: such important work now being carried out in joining up national preservation infrastructures for heritage data #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 8:08:37	Richards: optimistic for future of collab. Euro arch and remember that loosing data is more expensive than funding preservation! #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 8:14:27	Next CDH conference will be in Leiden 15-16 June 2017 #arkdis16	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 8:17:10	Hope you enjoyed the #arkdis16 tweets. Now for some wine. See you in Leiden!	Internet Archaeology
7/1/2016 11:25:41	@IntarchEditor really appreciating your tweeting from #arkdis16	Phil Riris
7/1/2016 12:00:44	@adamrabinowitz Also I was at #ArkDis16! So many interesting things happening, conference attendance would be more than a full-time job.	Eric Kansa
7/2/2016 6:04:29	#arkdis16 trip to Gamla Uppsala expertly guided by John Ljungkvist and @Julian62523002 tries out the AR app! https://t.co/EigFzEekfc	Internet Archaeology

Why archaeologists are so keen on reports and not on research data?

Isto discusses in a newly published article what hinders the archiving and use of archaeological primary data, and why reports, which according to many contain insufficient information, are popular among archaeologists.

Huvila, I. (2016). Awkwardness of becoming a boundary object: Mangle and materialities of reports, documentation data and the archaeological work. The Information Society, 32(4), 280-297.

Abstract: Information about an archaeological investigation is documented in an archaeological report, which makes it the boundary object par excellence for archaeological information work across stakeholder communities such as field archaeologists, heritage managers, and land developers. The quality of reports has been a subject of debate, and recently it has been argued that more emphasis should be placed on making primary research data at least similarly available. This study explores the changing materialities and reciprocal formation of documents and their users with the advent of digitization, and how documents form and lose their status as boundary objects in these processes. The study posits that in order to be functional, a boundary object needs to provide a disclosure that makes it accessible to cognate communities. Further, it shows how assumptions about the functioning of the human and nonhuman (material artifacts) influence the ways in which archaeologists conceptualize the preservation and archiving of archaeological information and the role and potential of different types of digital and paper-based documents. This article is based on an interview study of Swedish archaeology professionals (N D 16) with theoretical underpinnings in the notions of boundary objects, mangle of practice, and disclosure.

The full text of the article is available at dx.doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2016.1177763 and a post-print at http://www.istohuvila.se/node/484

How archiving of archaeology works in Sweden?

Isto discusses the information process of archiving and managing archaeological information in Sweden in a new article.

Huvila, I. (2016). 'If we just knew who should do it', or the social organization of the archiving of archaeology in Sweden. Information Research, 21(2).

Abstract: Introduction. This paper analyses the work practices and perspectives of professionals working with archaeological archives and the social organization of archaeological archiving and information management in Sweden. Method. The paper is based on an interview study of Swedish actors in the field of archaeological archiving (N=16). Analysis. The interviews were recorded and transcribed, then analysed using close reading. Results. We identified eight major work roles of archiving and managing archaeological information. Analysis of the recorded interviews show that there are multiple technical, legislative, conceptual and structural factors that influence and complicate the building, management and use of archaeological archives. Conclusions. Results show that the central challenge of archiving archaeology is the lack of efforts to influence and control the process by the involved actors. A mutual effort to be more explicit about concerns, needs and wishes of all participating organizations would help them to prioritise their work, take other actors concerns into account and develop their work practices to support more effectively the preservation of archaeological information.

The article is available open access at http://www.informationr.net/ir/21-2/paper713.html

(Digital) technology and archaeology

Many of the discussions at this year's edition of the Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology CAA 2016 conference held earlier this week in Oslo were directly or somewhat less directly related to anxieties (and occasional optimism) about the impact of various types of technologies (and social arrangements related to technologies) on archaeological (information) work and practices. For instance, the old debate between increased standardisation versus the support of flexibility in archaeological documentation and information management (cf. e.g. Huvila 2012) was still very much alive.

One of the most to the point comments was made by Kevin Woolridge who noted at the DigiTAG session that one of the major drivers of technology adoption has been to save resources and what has been happened is that the savings have been used to buy "f*cking helicopters" i.e. in general technologies that are fun to use but with somewhat questionable direct benefit to the archaeological work proper. At the same time, however, presenters noted that technologies do indeed have positive effects on archaeological work and for instance, as Lieberman and Tucker showed, the use of paperless documentation methods can actually increase communication and collaboration within field teams.

The significant question, however, is the general issue of what kind of impact the introduction, and in case of CAA attendants, experimentation with technologies, has on (archaeological) information work. My own presentation on the No man's business discussed the same issue in the context of archaeological archiving and information management by explicating the relation of social arrangements of how archaeological information work is managed in different countries (with a starting point in the Swedish practices) and the digitisation of information has on the value and qualities of archaeological information, and consequently on what archaeology turns out to be. Physical information management was slower and less oriented towards easiness and speed and as a consequence, it was also more tolerant towards complexity, local differences, improvisation and lack of unity. The digitalisation of information and our changed expectations about how information work should work has made us much less tolerant for local variety, incompatibilities and messiness of information practices even if that it at the same time something that the easiness and diversity of the digital realm endorses. In this sense, in order to make the consequences of technological influence and its consequences literally someone's business and to avoid investment in f*cking helicopters, it is important to be even more explicit than before of what is "archaeological (information) work" and according to whom and whose definition archaeological information practices are developed and regulated. Only then technology can be taken into use (in contrast to the technology taking us into use) and it is possible to open up for more diversity and flexibility in a sustainable manner.

(This text has been published also at http://www.istohuvila.se/node/476)

Registration open Archaeological Information in the Digital Society, The Conference

Register now for ARKDIS's conference in Uppsala June 30th - July 2nd 2016 in.

Archaeological Information in the Digital Society is a part of the series of annual Digital Heritage conferences hosted by the Centre for Digital Heritage. The first conference was held in 2014 in York and the second in Århus in 2015. In 2016, the third conference is organised by the Archaeological Information in the Digital Society (ARKDIS) research project in collaboration with the Department of ALM (Archives, Library & information, Museum & Cultural heritage studies), Uppsala University in Uppsala, Sweden.

Archaeological density surface estimates around Ostlänken using statistical machine learning techniques

WP 3 in ARKDIS is focused on developing new quantitative methods to work with the large amounts of data that is produces in archaeology. Based on the detailed information on GIS data from archaeological excavations compiled for the Ostlänken project, Daniel Löwenborg is now finalising a collaboration project with Mike Ashcroft and Anna Nilsson from the department of Information Technology, Uppsala University. The purpose is to use the information available from the excavations to estimate existence and densities of archaeological features in the parts of the Ostlänken corridor that has not been excavated. Estimates are based on existing data of number of features per square meter excavated area, including areas excavated without any evidence of archaeological features, and characterisations of the physical landscape as predictive variables.

Example of landscape variables calculated in GIS

The possibility to include “empty areas” are interesting and that kind of information has previously not been available in a format ready to analyse on a large scale. Likewise, previously there has not been this kind of detailed data available, with information about individual features found within an excavated area. Hence, there is now the possibility to work with much more data intensive materials, which in turn calls for new methods. Using techniques for statistical machine learning, Anna is writing a program that will calculate expected probability of existence and densities for the whole area as part of her Bachelor thesis. Predictions are based on a wide range of environmental variables describing the physical characterisation of land and topography within the area. As the correlation between archaeology and landscape can be expected to be weak, it will also be essential to estimate how well the model fit and how large errors that can be expected. Statistical machine learning is so far fairly untested with this kind of archaeological models, but holds the potential to greatly improve the process of visualizing and analysing macro- and micro- level patterns.

An illustration of how the Random Forest algorithm works.

With the finalised program it will be possible to use similar data to make predictions for any area. As we are currently seeing an increase of archaeological data being made available, with more to come in the near future by the DAP project at the Swedish National Heritage Board there will be even better possibilities for this kind of analysis in the future. With more data available, it will be possible to start working with different types of archaeological features, thus making models for only settlements or burial grounds, etc, as well as using the model with data from only certain time periods, making it possible to start asking some very specific archaeological question and explore settlement dynamics and social development.