Appendix to the Paper: Detecting the Aura of an Article

2026-07-15T18:58:54Z https://www.fdr.uni-hamburg.de/oai2d

oai:fdr.uni-hamburg.de:18819 2026-07-03T15:00:48Z user-csmc user-uhh

true 3.1 UHH.FDR 10.25592/uhhfdm.18819 Asselborn, Thomas 0009-0005-3011-7626 University of Lübeck, Institute for Information Systems, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562 Lübeck, Germany Bender, Magnus 0000-0002-1854-225X Aarhus University, Department of Management, Universitetsbyen 61, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark Möller, Ralf 0000-0002-1174-3323 University of Hamburg, Institute for Humanities-Centered AI, Warburgstraße 28, 20354 Hamburg, Germany Melzer, Sylvia 0000-0002-0144-5429 University of Hamburg, Centre for the Study of Manuscript Cultures, Warburgstraße 26, 20354 Hamburg, Germany Appendix to the Paper: Detecting the Aura of an Article – Was the Original Manuscript Seen? Universität Hamburg 2026 2026-06-29 Other https://www.fdr.uni-hamburg.de/record/oai:fdr.uni-hamburg.de:18819 10.25592/uhhfdm.18818 Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Open Access This is the appendix to the paper “Detecting the Aura of an Article – Was the Original Manuscript Seen?” to be published in the proceedings of the 21st Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems (FedCSIS) 2026. The proceedings will be made available online at: https://annals-csis.org/volumes/. Paper Abstract: This paper investigates whether scholarly texts reveal, through linguistic patterns, whether authors engaged directly with original artefacts or relied on facsimiles, digital or analogue. Drawing on debates about reproduction and materiality, it frames this question as a classification task and evaluates machine learning approaches using both synthetic and real-world data. While initial experiments under controlled conditions suggest that certain linguistic features may correlate with different modes of access, these patterns prove unstable in practice. Key challenges include the lack of reliable ground truth labels, the influence of domain-specific writing conventions, and multilingual variation. In particular, highly standardised descriptive language in specialised fields limits the discriminative power of textual features. The findings indicate that the task is fundamentally ill-posed under standard assumptions, highlighting the limits of data-driven methods in capturing epistemic conditions that are only partially encoded in text. The research for this paper was partially funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Germany's Excellence Strategy - EXC 2176 "Understanding Written Artefacts: Material, Interaction and Transmission in Manuscript Cultures", project no. 390893796. Parts of this research were conducted within the scope of the Centre for the Study of Manuscript Cultures (CSMC) at University of Hamburg. This contribution was partially funded by the Danish National Research Foundation (DNRF193) through TEXT: Centre for Contemporary Cultures of Text at Aarhus University.