I hope I know what I'm doing. This is the first time I've done this. So, I've lived up to the issue forever, but I'm going to have to address this. I'm newbie.  It's nice to meet you. I think I've seen your name when I was there. I've been in my agency for probably a year now. I work in the business. Oh, do you do? Yeah, I do. I'm here for you. For an extra time. Yeah, I'm here for you. I'm here for you. Okay, next slide. And you must be able to read. I've got English in there. Oh, yeah. Okay. Oh, and do they have papers for them? Yeah, they do. And that's for them? Yes. If none of I think I have an extra. How many are there? 11. 12. Yeah. Okay. Oh, yeah. No, we are completely almost. You're taking the place. What's your job? I am a. Okay, but then. Oh, that's right. Oh, there I have one here. There wasn't one here. I don't know if she really needs it. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Stop it. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Do you think you are ready to begin? I think so. Okay. All right. This is round one. Question number one. Create. Island. Thank Helena Island. And the Azores were formed by what? Geological. Phenomenon. Incorrect answer. Okay. Create. Island. And the Azores were formed by what? Geological. Phenomenon. That is correct. That is correct. Okay. Bonus number one. Or summer one. New ways to say old saying. This proverb can be restated as the thirst for knowledge. Put the domesticated feline to death. That is correct. Now that's okay. Question number two. Think what you could do with social media. After writing a marginally truthful narrative of his life in 1834, he authorized a series of almanacs in his name that abandoned the truth and exaggerated his exploits in the wilderness. Those almanacs continued until 1856. 20 years after his death in San Antonio. Who was the self-made legend whose first name was Davey? Davey Crawford. Number one. After writing a marginally truthful narrative of his life in 1834, he authorized a series of almanacs in his name that abandoned the truth and exaggerated his exploits in the wilderness. Those almanacs continued until 1856. Either one of these ways could be a logic. It has to be a knowledge. Definitely. Okay. We'll go on to question number three. Linear type of straight line at height B has equation Y equal B. That is correct. Now I will read the bonus. State site. In which state could you see the Minuteman missile historic site? Deadwood where Wild Bill Hickok was shot. A full-sized replica of Michelangelo Davis in Sioux Falls. And of course, the Black Hill. That is correct. Question number four. Reading the menu. What does all of mode mean when you're ordering your dessert? That's incorrect. I'll repeat the question for your folks. Reading the menu. What does all of mode mean when you're ordering dessert? That is incorrect. It means with ice cream. Toss-up number five is a paper and pencil. Excuse me. Toss-up number five is not a paper. The bonus will be the paper. Sorry. Flexibility. Cats can do it. Cats can do it. Cats can do it. Cats can do it. Cats can do it. Cats can fit through tiny spaces partly because they have no clavicle. What is the common name for these bones near the shoulders? That is incorrect. I'll read for Sumberland. Flexibility. Cats can fit through tiny spaces partly because they have no clavicle. What is the common name for these bones near the shoulders? That is correct. Okay. The bonus for number five is a paper and pencil. Right around average. Let's do that. Five tendons have an average weight of 40 pounds. Ways 38 pounds. Cats weighs 32 pounds. Ways 36 pounds. Ways 50 pounds and breaks the scale. How much does the final penguin weigh in town? It's a bonus. 44 pounds. Captain, get that in. I'm sorry. Only the captain can get the answer. That was correct. Number six. No, it's on my computer. Sorry. I didn't click out of it. I have it on right on here. Thank you. Question number six. Water on both sides. Two oceans. Both touch the most continent. So let me start that again. Two oceans both touch the most continent. Four each. Which are the only two continents. That touch both oceans. Correct. Summerlin. Water on both sides. Two oceans both touch the most continent. Four each. Which are the only two continents. That touch both oceans. That is correct. Bonus number six. No dessert for me. This Empress never actually said let them eat cake. But she did lose her head at the guillotine in 1793. Name her. That is correct. Question number seven. Okay, I'll just wait a second. Check the score here. Question number seven. What astrophysicist is the author of the seminal work? A brief history of time. The answer is Stephen Hawking. Question number eight. First in discovery. This explorer was not the first to discover the new world. Christopher Columbus. That is incorrect. Summerlin. Question number eight. First in discovery. This explorer wasn't the first to discover the new world. But he was the first to realize and write about the fact that it was a whole new land and not the eastern part of the Asian continent as Columbus had been. For this, a map maker created a map with the new super continent named after which Italian explorer. The correct answer is Amerigo Vespucci. Question number nine. Sports history. Hank Aaron began his major league career in one city and ended it in the same city. But with different teams as teams move. The teams were the brewers and the braves. Which Wisconsin... Someone number three. Milwaukee, Wisconsin. That is correct. Bonus number one, Summerlin. No, number nine. Sorry, I have this type of one. Honoring the author. Every year since sometime in the 1930s until 2009, three roses and a half empty bottle of cognac were left on the Baltimore grave of what American Gothic writer on his birthday, January 19th. The correct answer is Edgar Allen Poe. If you have a ready-made request. Question number 10 of tourists. Which sprawling California city has both big city and beach? It also has amusement parks and celebrities. Los Angeles, California. That is correct. Thank you for holding your machines up. It helps us to see. This bonus is a paper and pencil. What's X? Let's do math. Fall for X in this equation. 17 X minus 23 equal 8. Negative 23 equal. This is a bonus. I don't know what that means. Oh, it's over. Excuse me. The correct answer was 31, 20 X or 1.55 or 111. I'm looking for a light. Sorry, a few guys. That was quick, Ken. We completely finished. In the pool play, we go through all 12 questions because their points may make a difference in the end. Perfect. Thank you, Brad. Question number 11. Finding your way around the U.S. This state has the highest population density in the United States. If you say it is the largest river in which state passing by Newark on its way to the Atlantic. That is incorrect. Question number 11. Finding your way around the United States. This state has the highest population density in the United States. But the state is the largest river in which state passing by Newark on its way to the Atlantic. I'm sorry. The correct answer is New Jersey. Question number 12. Football event. It can occur as the result of a fumble and interception. That is incorrect. Question number 12. It can occur as the result of a fumble and interception. A punch or a kickoff. It is defined as any occasion where a ball is dead on or behind a team's own goal line. Name this football outcome that gives a team the ball 25 yards. That is correct. Question number 12. Coral bleaching. Coral bleaching. Bleaching, which is when coral lose their colorful, symbiotic algae is believed to result from unusually warm water, changes in ocean salinity, or excessive exposure to what electromagnetic radiation more concentrated due to the depletion of the ozone layer. That is incorrect. Correct answer is ultravide-up razor UV rays. And that is complete round 1. Ok. So if you will, we turn to yours D. And attention please. Thank you very much for being here today. Ok. Have a good evening. Yes. Thank you all that time. I don't think so.


from downtown San Francisco. It's theCUBE, covering RSA North America 2018. Hey, welcome back everybody. Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. We're at the RSA conference in downtown San Francisco. 40,000 plus professionals all about security. And one of the big themes is how do we work together? How do we leverage our collective knowledge, look for patterns to help be better against the bad guys? And one of the really big forces for that is the Cyber Threat Alliance. So we're really excited to have Michael Daniel, the president and CEO of Cyber Threat Alliance. Michael, great to see you. Thanks for having me. So talk about kind of the genesis of this because it's such an important concept that yes, we're competitors on this floor, but if we work together, we can probably save ourselves a lot of work. Absolutely. I mean, part of the idea behind the Cyber Threat Alliance is that no matter how big you are, no matter how broad your coverage as a cybersecurity company, no one individual company ever sees all of the threats, all of the time. And so that in order to better protect their customers and clients, sharing that threat intelligence at speed at scale is a very fundamental part of being a much better cybersecurity company. So how hard of a sell was that a year ago? I think you started it a year ago, announced it. And how has the ecosystem kind of changed over the last year?  We shouldn't do that, right? It's really finding the way for a cybersecurity company to fit it into their business model, to be able to consume the threat intelligence at a speed that matters and really be able to bake it into their products. That's usually the hard part. Conceptually, everybody agrees that this is what we need to do. Right. And then how about just the nitty gritty nuts and bolts of how do you share information? How is it picked up? How's it communicated? What are the protocols? I imagine that's not too simple. That's right. And one of the things that we settled on was we used the sticks format because it's an open format that everybody can translate back and forth. We had to build in a lot of business rules to actually make sure that people were playing fair. You know, for example, we actually require all of our members to share. So you can't just join the alliance and consume information you actually have to give in order to receive. Right. And you've got some really kind of high level lofty goals that you've built us around in terms of doing good for the greater good, kind of beyond the profitability of an individual customer transactions. I wonder if you could speak to a few of those. Well, sure. So part of the idea behind the way that CTA is structured is that we're a 501C6. So we're a nonprofit, right? And the idea is that we function to help raise the level of cybersecurity across the digital ecosystem and actually enable our member companies to compete more effectively because they have better intelligence that their products and services are based on. But we ourselves are not in it to make money. Right, right, right. All right, Michael. Unfortunately, we're up against the times and we're going to have to leave it there. But love the work that you guys are doing and it makes so much sense for people to work together. Well, thank you very much. Thank you for having me. All right, he's Michael from Cyber Threat Alliance. I'm Jeff from theCUBE. You're watching us from the RSA Conference in San Francisco. Thanks for watching.


Hello everybody and welcome to another episode of Just Fast and Furious Alive where today We have got so much. We've got a new apex coming to cover We've got a new update and buffs and nerfs to certain dinosaurs coming. We've also Got something to show you as well. So before we get into it before we go, you know, too too deep into it I was making sure that hadn't turned on the above light that casts weird shadows So he has you see right here. We have the incubators and you know, we used to stuff like this I said, you know, whatever, but what did you believe? Oh, that's so generous. It says plus 50 percent. I don't know what it means by plus 50 percent Like we you normally get 200 out of these incubators. So no idea what that means. So Oh So that's brilliant. Thanks, Lydia. I always want to spend money. So we open up 15,000 and of course 200. Oh wait. No, I would have been at this one thousand two hundred never mind It is what it is So of course we had that we can get that out of the way and Before we get into the rest of the meeting bones of this video Let's have a quick look at what's coming up in this week. So when's it Thursday? I mean, you know, I don't know when this is a bloating. It could be Thursday. It could be Friday I don't know. There's a lot of videos coming out soon. I'll source Jacob Rex irritate it Hold on when I'm gonna talk about those. Whatever's Friday Saturday is where you get your epics. We got Africa the source Giga and also T Rex. Yeah, well those Giga, of course has the gig and connects to whatever you call it And I can source does have some good hybrids on the Friday You've also got a baron X legendary incubator to get but the Sunday Normally, we've had like a legendary unique to dart for the past few weeks. It feels but this time we only get legendaries and Oh, it's gonna be a hard one for you to choose because you've got the Thor dole Alice in a seratops. I think it's called which you need for Thor dole. So you could get that you could get in Dominus Rex That's an option or Rexie It's up to you. I mean, I would definitely not choose Rexie as it's not a complete pay-to-win dinosaur Yes, choose Rexie and of all of those choose Rex. I think Rexie and in Dominus are probably the hardest ones to dart I'm not I have to be an agent so I'm Dominus Rex, but that I always remember being really difficult But yeah, just start Rexie man. Just start Rexie. I we're gonna get into new hybrids coming soon Apex hybrids that is but also we got a new season pass to cover my god So much in this episode. It's gonna be awesome. Um, or is it we'll see But yes, Rexie don't down this Sunday. Also, there's an incubator legendary one to get an epic whatever you want to call it I think that's the legendaries red and a coin chase for only one day So get your coins while you can and then Monday Tuesday. Isn't too bad. You got Spinosaurus me You've got my super lion, which is actually, you know, all right. This is a good hybrid for it and also Albertus, Albertusaurus. Albertusaurus, of course, you need for that really swapping killer hybrid unique one Anyway, that is this week's things over and done with so before we jump into anything else We'll go back into the game and we'll have a look at this because we have a new Like what you call it pass and of course there was the there was like there's three options for this You can either do the free one you can do the the paid one which I think is $80.99 or you can do the Which is like how much like 31 quid 32 quid something ridiculous So of course we did that one because that's what we are here on the channel join the dark side welcome But I was also a bit clever with the way I've done this because if we're going to missions we can collect all of these So unfortunately a giga has left us now. We no longer have a gig so we were on rank 11 just by buying it you unlock certain things right away and Because I had a feeling that this was going to happen. I saved a lot of my VIP points So this being the weekly one which is this so I save that So this could all get added towards this because I was thinking hold on a minute We I got a week and a month thing which is going to clock over to the same time that the event is going to be So I was like, ah, why don't I just save them just in case? Yeah, they came in handy so we got 55 which is going to take us to I think Oh my god, really? Oh, we're on 13. So we'll collect of course the Listerosaurus. I think it is oh Lister so look at that. I know what I'm talking about kind of not really But we've also got the monthly ones you've got a complete seven weekly mission for we're gonna get close that one We do have the 201 so there you go 200 nod. So we were on 11 and now we're on 16 Unfortunately, you don't get any cool like being passed straight away, but you get you get the picture It's basically that so let's have a look at our rewards starting from the top You've got free wise you got a baronics, which I guess isn't so bad. It's a barionics. Hey, why not? But then the other one is like the actual legendary hybrid now. I've got a lot of this So I don't really need to worry about this this Giga pass is not as good as the previous one. I don't think because I gave you rexie and rexies You know used a lot. However Depends on you want to see it because I mean the other one gave you rexie it gave you Mortum rex as well. So an apex this one for the only other time in this game is giving you boost resets Because they were a thing which completely vanished. Don't they lose you remember that? They don't So we got a gig a dinner which of course we need for gig and connects you got the 50 We'll take that a poster sucus. I'm assuming that's for oh god Anna Dometridon. What are these for? There must be ingredients for the same hybrid you got a 50 So you get that a little bit later with the free one But if you're of course paid you get this one, which is really freaking good Also, some dinosaur is going to get buffed once we've done this We'll go in and explain what's getting buff and what is what isn't I've also got a Exclusive a winky eye licking names giga, which is um provocative So got a it was another 150 giga Uh some Dometridon the poster sucus hybrid Okay, also basically 200 giga DNA because it's a giga cent and you're probably going to get dot about 200 Uh, we got the poster sucus hybrid again You've got the tirano Freystonics you've got another giga now the reason I'm collecting this is because I have known I've used them all Um, so that's another 200 giga. There's another 100 giga Uh, oh my god. Wow, and that's where we're up to we're up to 11 and now we're up to 16 So another 500 another 50 giga See that's what they do they make it look like sometimes it's better to do the free one but overall It's not it's never better to do the free one Uh 100 barionics Okay, okay 166 of that we got oh a name Fearless foe. Oh yay. Wow Amazing oh and that is that as far as we got surely not. Why did it just zoom me up almost a clicked it? Okay, so then a 50 Tristanics, which you don't need to worry about another 50 of the giga hybrid very close to a level 28 What we could do as well. We could you know, like just boost through this and get them all Right away, but honestly, there's no point in doing that. I mean, yeah I suppose you get everything instantly, but then that's 500 odd books a pop and even that it might be more Um, there could be safer, you know actually getting boost. So I'd rather do that A cool giga emblem. That's not so bad Uh, another giga. Yes And try Brilliant is the next one. Oh, no, I don't want to go back to that. I don't want that rare one And then if we want we could spend 400 bucks and get a hundred of the giga necks Uh hybrid so looking further down Uh prices kind of normal what we've seen before that one is a different emote. Okay 150 of that And then here we go like where have these been and why is one of them locked behind a paywall Why what are you doing this? This was supposed to be like I thought it was going to be every tournament alliance tournament We were going to just get given them, you know one per Uh, or like one of each type per incubator or something, you know, whatever you got the higher incubator got Obviously the more you got but no, we're not doing nothing. Don't know why we're doing that We'll put one behind a paywall. Thank you. Okay, brilliant and weird thing is you've if even if you pay for this You get the the health reset and the speed reset. Where's the attack reset? Am I missing something? Is this the only way you can get them? Okay, uh, so 200 that and then finally if you do get the free one you get the beseasure Uh, sort of skin for the trishtonics, but you get the citadel skin for the giga hybrid However, both of them are pretty meh Like if the roles were reversed and the regular skin was the actual skin that you had to pay to get I'd probably want the pay to get skin Or you know the free one that we get because those ones aren't that good Sorry if I've confused you that I did that amazingly well, didn't I? So let's have a look. Let's go back into here and let's see if we confuse this Oh, I got 15 do-do-do DNA. Also, of course, we unlocked the Dreadactylus hybrid, I think it was with the most recent alliance tournament There's been a whole reset in the game. So, um, I don't know. Maybe we'll do some battles And maybe we'll get lucky and we'll quickly rank up to lube our shores I don't think we'll be able to do that, but you know The thoughts there maybe if we're lucky. So we got 250 so we could even level it up again If we wanted to but I don't even know what I'd use that for right and here we are in the dino changes So according to the we're adjusting this legendary herbivores kit to increase its usefulness against those pesky flocks As well as increase its power in raids and pvp. It doesn't say what legendary herbivore Okay, our analytics showed this unique hit and run was underperforming in the meta. Therefore, we're giving Utaran X a solid buff That's what I use. Okay. While maintaining their hit and run niche. Wow. Okay. So out of all of the hybrids The you know, we've seen in the game Uh, Utaran X has been there from the start and slowly It's it seemed like every update it's got more and more Um, like buffs it got like a little bit more armor It got a little bit more crit It got a little bit more attack And now it looks like what wait what our analytics showed it is underperforming Therefore, we're giving Utaran X a solid buff while maintaining their hit and run niche doesn't say what they're doing to it But it's there. Okay, uh tricor. So of course the t-rex hybrid is one of the first uniques to enter Jurassic World alive And it needs a few more tweaks to keep up with new power players its new devourability will help Interesting doesn't say what the devour is But okay, uh Diloratchie Dilicherys. Oh my god. These are all like This is what I wanted to see I was hoping that we would see a change to ludi because for the longest time They've just been it's been this process of adding new hybrid make it the best May wait for everyone to like max it out and put buffs on it nerf it repeat for us But now they're actually taking the originals like Utaran X tricor source Dilicherys or Dilicherys were even called and now they're giving them buffs So Dilicherys is another of our really uniques that could use a spruce. You're telling me Uh including a bit more identity to suit this powerful healer The new changes should make Dilicherys as good a good rate option Why not try using them instead of Tremoloch? Interesting see Tremoloch could speed boost and then heal heal So we'll interested to see where that goes and tenota rex as well as receiving a slight change in their abilities To bring more variety to the ways players can deploy them We've added devour to their distracting impact to keep your opponents guessing interesting and the only change to a New dinosaur the giganix which are giggling. I don't know where you call it that one Um, they have was set loose in just a world in the latest update the analytics on this creature in And it's performance is not quite of a level antenna.  So here is giganix Um, we can now fuse it quite a bit. I think we can do you have five fuses because we've got a thousand DNA Well, you know what a hundred Hundred for five which means that each one was 20 Yeah, it's not good. It's not good at all But you know we get it to level 28. It seems like it's going to get a buff Apparently the buff has already been put in But I don't really know What that buff is exactly, but you know, it's in the game Maybe we'll see it. We'll do one more pop because we can And I think this accompanied with the you know, the pass will allow me to probably get it to level 28 Also, I have been told by people in my alliance server That the way I've done rex see is good, but it could be better Basically, I've had just a Too many speed boosts and the rest should go in help So if we have a look at this we for probably oh we can refund there we go I mean get one down one tier. Yes So I'll get to about like 26 so we'll take two off because I can't because I got loads I suppose I don't have attack that much. That's the difference So we'll put two more help boots on just to get it over And out of the the dangerous threat range that like a referendum Can kill it in one hit or a forex can kill it in one hit that way You know, we've still got the the speed if we use our priority It's going to do a lot of damage. We also got a lot of speed And now now we're safe. I think this is going to really help rex you perform and thank you tiger players for doing that For letting me know I was stupid. I was so with all this being said There has been a poll recently Where ludia has left it up to you guys the fans to choose a new apex, you know dinosaur apex Of course, so one of the best dinosaurs in the game So it's going to be really good and we're going to go over the the roster of selections and also the winner So we'll start with the first one. I mean, these were all set up for votes And it was up to you guys to choose which one you really wanted Um, we I'll let you guess if you don't know which one was picked So we'll just go over the uh the candidates. So first was comps scorpius Which was the um the like compi hybrid and also scorpious rex gen 3 hybrid Uh, if you play this game for as long as I have you probably got scorpious rex gen 3 maxed up So having another I mean it's different. It's another flock creature Um and to have an apex the first ever flock apex might not been too bad Um in hybrid ingredients is comps of callus and scorpious rex gen 3. That's it Um, and the next one is the geminidus or gemini deus Um now this one actually I would have been pretty happy with because its ingredients are gemini titan And we haven't seen gemini titan in a long time a really long time Every now and again you might bump into it, but it's it's usurped by way better hybrids if we're going to be honest But stegodus was one of the best creatures when this game initially launched I remember using it and that's why I think I've got level 22 even Um, so for it to finally get a hybrid would it would be really freaking good Um, I don't know what the stats or everything else would have been like for this But at least you know I saw a pod apex would have been good The next one is the indominemis or indonemis I should say This of course is no surprise. It's indominus rex Uh ingredient as well as smiley nemes Um, I mean it's kind of it's the concept art looks all these concept arts look brilliant The fact that ludia puts in you know Money to just show us a concept art about these creatures is really cool now We know from indotaurus that it was stood upright, right? However when we got into torus it was on all fours So I don't know if there's no communication with the concept artist and the actual rigors and stuff like that But whatever um Whereas hopefully I mean this one is probably going to look like that because it'll just take the indominus rex every There's no interact. I don't think it's going to be on all fours like a smile and emis The next one is the caratolania caratolania that one. Yes This is mammalania, which you know has kind of been used a lot and I see it every now and again And the caratoprocus or porcus whatever you call it I have never seen that really used outside of uh skill tournaments But you know I'm not if if this was a hybrid again pretty cool another different kind of apex and the final one Uh, this is a wild card hybrid and would have been quite interesting to have seen uh People get this this is the monola servia monocuvia This is a monolow metrodon And greeted and the alberta servia now a bird of curvia What do you want to call it is used a lot? It's maxed attacked It's it's maxed out of course and you swap it in you do some damage And then you've got priority which instantly boosts your attack by 50 a bit like rex he has As well as it having a really good counter So as soon as it gets hit, you know, it does some damage and vulnerability damage I think it is as well And you know, if you've got your attack up, you're already doing a 50% extra on whatever you've been dealt Um, so this one would have been one of my least favorite ones to have got a hybrid because It would have been just so hard to unlock Basically like alberta sorus is one of those dinosaurs that I don't even think it's in the wild It's only from events and sanctuaries you can get it from Um, but the winner would you believe up again? What do you think it's gonna be it is into that means Another indominus rex hybrid I think I would have preferred this probably my second Most wanted one my first most unwanted one was of course the alberta hybrid This one really another indominus rex hybrid Oh my god, so let's just have a look at this you've The eulacosaurus whatever you want to call it that one Eulodominus whatever it is the therosinosaurus indominus you got in the torus Yeah, and now you're gonna have indonemies Now there's been a few people in the community that have said it's been a bit rigged Uh, because other people have told everyone to vote for it. However, I think there probably is a part of that 100 percent I think it's up to anyone who's got a fan base like myself to you know If you want something you have you know, and it could be for the game It could be for the benefit of the game. Why not just say hey, I'd like this if you want to vote for it go for it um But it's indominus rex man like If if that's going to get a hybrid People are going to be like there's a lot of kids that'll play a lot of kids that want to see it Even like in 3d form even if they don't really play the game they'll vote for it Like you know it's it's indominus rex since drossack world. It's still super popular So it's not much of a surprise that indominus rex got the vote Um, but the concerning thing is that yes, it's another indominus rex hybrid So I think indominus rex is like a three three freaking hybrids test of covenus Which is something I've maxed up to level 30 also This thing goes into an apex. So if I want the bear, I've got to get more test of covenus DNA and that means that I'm going to have to get more of test of covenus as ingredients And what are test of covenus and ingredients? Carbo to seratops and what are carbon seratops ingredients carbonemis? What does carbonemis go into? Smiling emis so in order to get This indonemis you need even more carbonemis DNA So carbonemis has now just become the giant prehistoric turtle has become one of the most sawn after dinosaurs Or pretty well not even dinosaur Uh, prehistoric reptiles in the entire game because it goes into two apexes I don't know why Lady didn't think this through and be like wait, hold on a minute You're gonna need a lot of DNA to get and we have one of the ingredients that is used for both of them Yeah, that's fine Oh, it's like so hopefully we'll get some event to get even more the thing is um with smiling emis It has been In uh raids for a long time and I have never done them because I've never really wanted to use smiling emis So that that's on me for not doing it for not getting that DNA when I probably should have But at the same time, I think the raid was a pain in the arse Uh, so smiling emis is going to get a hybrid and now pretty much All of the carbonemis you want you should have is probably going to go into this thing now to prepare For this. We'll have a look at indominus rex just to see how much DNA I've got in that So here it is indominus rex and you need a velociraptor and t-rex. I've actually got a level 30 t-rex anyway Um, so if I know that I might not have maxed that thing up, but I maxed that over a long time and go because it's rex I want it max level. Um and indominus rex I mean the ingredients aren't too hard. It's velociraptor and t-rex. I'm not too fussed about that Um, but it also has urlidominus indoraptor and now it's going to get a freaking apex I get it. It's the flagship of Jurassic world But really I would have so much preferred to get the geminidus that like ankylosaur You know, um, sorry stegosaur Apatosaur apex would have been so cool to see or even you know Something different, you know, like the the flock the comsognatus apex or even the mammalania apex Not not the albert. We don't want that but it would have been nice to have seen something different, right? Or am I wrong? It'll be interesting to see what drops out and who gets that instant I assume because it's smiling Emmys that's had a raid for rages carbon Emmys has been out for a while and then dominus rex been one of the ingredients As soon as this new apex comes out, you're gonna have people instantly instantly max at the level 30 and boost it You'll see in the tournament 100 you'll see in the tournament instantly Uh, so that was kind of nothing So why don't we start the best part of these videos and do some models? Also, it might be sacrilegious, but I've started playing pokemon girl after how many years and I'm actually really enjoying it It's really good. Like I'm I'm noticing the differences now between dressable the live and pokemon girl thing I'll start with ankylosaur because it's ankylosaur ankylosaur. We might as well and it's against the tricor so it's really good Yes, he is faster however And he for some odd reason goes for that one I mean how much damage would you you want to do more damage going for your other attack you fool? All right. Well, anyway, yeah, I like I find it Like pokemon go is way better if you're the sort of person that likes to go out And likes to go search for things whereas dressable the live I've realized is just way way way more focused on something like um Battles like this it is way more in depth is way more in detailed But at the same time it got me thinking like the battles in You know, we'll go for this one because he's probably gonna just go for his biggest hit and finish me So predicting that we'll just nullify his attack Um, and and whereas pokemon go, you know, is it has the battles on the bridge, right good It does have the battles but also at the same time It's it's battles on too complicated and it got me thinking like is Jurassic world Alive over complicated Like yeah, you got all these dinosaurs with arm and critical hits debuffs friggin You know Speed attack different like there's so much and it's so good. I I don't know I think they both do that their roles well, but I just wish the Jurassic world I've developed more of it's going out You know and exploring the world because that's what I love doing and only once in you know My entire time of playing this game. Have I ever? Been with a group of people playing Jurassic world alive. It's never happened. Whereas the pokemon go I've done that like, you know, well, I went to first thought I've done that But I I could very easily if I wanted to join a discord and have a group people and go round Um, whereas, you know, I know the the player base is a lot smaller may as well Just nullify it a little bit more because it's probably gonna go For it's like big hit isn't it? I think it's gonna go for its big hit So we'll just make sure we nullify as much damage as we can before we go for a really big hit now Um, now if we wanted to I guess I could swap in anglosaur looks or something else because he's probably gonna go Oh, no, he's not going for that. Oh, okay, cool A model right out on a tricor is this guy preparing for the update? I he might be Oh a paratops interesting interesting um So so so so what do we do here? Do you think? Uh, you know, I'll go for this expecting him to probably go for his heel. You may even get a stun I don't even it's done a thing. I don't know. I don't think stuns are thing. I keep forgetting I mean, I'm assuming when this update comes out we'll get new icons fixed for that I he'll probably just go for a hill here if he does that's fine. Oh, he does it. Okay, cool Um, right you killing ref perfectly fine Ooh, what do we go for? He's good. I mean he's got his priority. Uh, heel, right? Um, but I could kill him with rexie and if he swaps out He'll he I don't think he'll die. I don't think that's gonna happen to him Uh, no if I was him, I'd probably just swap out just because is it max attack It's not max attack, but it's pretty darn close Yeah, if I like I've asked him how I would've done that I'm probably I might get the hit 50 chance basically didn't get the crit I probably could have killed him if I did get the crit, but I'll bear that in mind It's something to look out for uh that paratops So, okay, is it faster than me 125? Oh, it's one slower and it will still be slower after the next turn Oh Okay, so in this case taking the speed off my tx and putting more health on has worked out for this battle Um, so oh there's the crit. Oh, it doesn't go through unfortunately Right, so we are quicker I think because we both increased our speed by 50 percent. No No Okay, never mind. Maybe it would have worked if I'd kept my speed on but hey, oh Um, I mean he'll go for the tux of quills. He could stun me here Uh, I was gonna say it's very unlikely. He does actually get the stun We could go through his thing here and we don't but All's fair in love and war I suppose Uh, well what we'll do though is we will switch to Um this ankle solox because he'll go for his biggest hit and then we'll just kill him in a passive And I want to try and just coax out his paratops to kill me.   I assume he's swapping What are you why he's going? He's swapping to paratops to do loads of damage to me, but What's the point when your paratops is gonna die and it's so good? No No, which oh we got a crit though Got a crit though Okay, um, what what's Um, I mean it depends what he's got here really um All right, you know, I'll just go for this and just Fingers crossed we don't have a forex and we don't have a referendum Right. I know it's asking a lot. It's asking a lot, right I would have thought you would have swapped them in before though if he had them Wait, what what what else does he have you've got it? You've got to have something surely Okay, he's lost. Well, that was gg what well well played uh You're definitely dead. You're definitely dead. I yeah, he still gets the dodges every time though Yo, well there you go rex. He actually won him may have won it Quicker possibly if I had the speed increase, but you know what? I'll happily take their health in this case. Okay second battle. We're in gyrosphere now, baby Oh, and oh, that's a good team. You got anglo-solox. You got that paratops. Was it ref? It might be if it's ref as well. They oh an imperative suit just level 26. Oh, he's just got it Interesting interesting. It's it's yeah That's that's cool. That's cool. It's like passive against passive. Who will win? I don't think he can get immune though Oh, man, this is gonna be good. Is none of us can swap or at least I can't swap Yeah, I don't I don't even get to uh vulnerability not immune what I'm talking about So there's his count. Okay. Okay. Now. He does have his bask ability um He might go for it here knowing that I'll just gonna go for the stun If he does like how much damage does he get he always already gonna stun me anyway if he does it Yeah, uh, so may as well just let him get that off then. Yeah, he's gonna get us done Does heal himself. It's interesting um Right, what do we go for here? Uh damage over time. Yeah, I think we just go for a big hit man Yeah, just go for it. Oh wait. He's quicker. No. Oh, wow Embarrassing just showing how good it is against ankle. So looks I like it. Um So so so so so I'll go for referendum I think after that heavy loss right off the bat probably gonna lose this one Um, but now I know I like I said, I'm very rarely face up against um uh imperative sutures At all so seeing just how much damage you can do against That that's quite interesting Okay, so he's gonna get the bleed off Referendum very good against it apparently I'm learning so all sorts here Also, I apologize for the last video where people were screaming at the screen for me to switch in rexie I know the perfect opportunity. I didn't notice it after the fact, but hey, um, so What could we do here? Um, we could you know, I'm just gonna do this.  It is 2005 earn. So it's pretty decent, but we'll just nullify his attack We'll nullify his attack and lower his attack. Does he have any oh, he's not even resisting against it. Wow Oh, that's that's bad. Okay. Well, if you're gonna crit We're good Does some damage this time. Look at look at this thing.  No a little crit would have helped damage Well, this is really interesting.  Okay. So we lost, you know, just less than half Um, now I don't know are we vulnerable? Oh, we are vulnerable. It's worked out perfectly for him So he can kill me in one hit now Um, now if I swapped in paratops, it's 2600 um Yeah, I'll swap in paratops.  We're not we're not gonna survive Yeah, he'll go for his biggest hit. Oh, yeah after that, I'm close to looks at the start I know not did not did not look good for me this time. Um, so I mean I'll do 3850 percent chance of a coin flip that I will kill him Uh, whereas this one I got 20 percent chance of a crit. I may as well just go for rexy may as well go for it um now Ooh, if he acts This is interesting as cool down. Now if he goes for his alert nullification I'll just go for it. I knew you do it. I knew you do it. Damn. Damn it. Damn it. Damn it. Actually, it's it's not bad We still kill them, but I was thinking if I big I could big brain him here and go for my revenge Oh, and I'm quicker now though. At least I suppose he can't switch out or else he dies um Now if I Hold on if I go for this, how many turns do I get attack for cleanser hill point six damage dealt over four turns So I'm kind of tempted just to do that anyway, but I'll not I'll save it. Uh, do I have my attack for this next upcoming turn? Hopefully no, I don't Oh, but I have a damage reduction though. Oh, it's in the torus. It's in the torus. It's not looking good Oh, it's yeah, it's really not looking good Oh Right, I have to get through. I have to get through his cloak twice. I have to get through his cloak twice here So first one Don't get through now lost I mean it was worth the shot, right? It was worth the shot. I what I could have done is I guess switched to um Oh, what's it called? Oh, yeah, he's got armor as well. No, he doesn't have one. What's going on here? Oh, yeah, of course I do Yeah, sure. We'll get the crit this time 100% just you watch I was thinking if I switch to referentum, there's the crit and I didn't get through it again What's with these dodges man? They're so lucky I mean, I guess there's more chance of me not getting through than there is the way But if I if I'd went for I mean, how much damage would you have done? For that? Yeah, it didn't matter even if I was switched into ref There's nothing I could have done that I would have went through his dodge and bled him But then he would have like cleansed That the loss of anglisle looks at the start was what tip the tip the balance there, but hey, we'll do one more We'll also play pokemon go at the same time. Whoo All right, okay defeat three creatures. Come on. I'm back in the blooming man Uh, you know what? I'm gonna start with imperative suits. I'm gonna do it Like getting that heal the basket straight away is a good idea. Let's have a look. Oh, it's a ref This isn't so good Yeah, okay, like that's what I ended killing him with so Hey, ho, I mean like I was tempted to start on my own ref But we'll see what he wants to do here. Yeah, I mean it's it's the best play But the thing is I want to slow him down I want to slow him down and I also want to get some bleed damage off on him Uh, we're not gonna do anything on the counter though Hmm and nothing on that one either Oh Okay, so we're gonna take a fair bit of bleed. I think We'll have a look though. Is it is a lot bleed No, it's not. Okay. It's about the same as him. I always forget like what its resistance is So we'll go we'll go for the best now because he's gonna go for his giant hit Oh, we stunned him. We actually stunned him. No way. Oh, that is brilliant Now that was unlucky. Well, the chances of that Oh man, okay So we could do that or we could bleed him out and make him slower again I'm gonna bleed him out make him slower again Um, because I don't think he's gonna be able to do his Uh, this one's super distraction. Okay, it cleanses damage over time. That's fine. Uh, but he's still slow That's it.  What are you gonna do?  Uh, oh What are we going to do? Um, I could switch in referendum go for my priority and kill him But that's kind of a waste. Um I'm gonna do something weird. I'm gonna do a weird play here. Um, because I'm gonna do this I'm gonna I'm gonna do a swap to paratops I'm thinking he might want to save it. Oh, he doesn't. Okay. Oh, he's vulnerable anyway That's a lot of damage Yeah, I want to do this because then I can do the annoying setup which is basically just heal and get out Um, so Yep, he'll do uh, probably oh, he doesn't do his group accelerate interesting. Okay. Okay Um, I thought he would go for his nullifying but he's expecting me to do this Okay All right, let's play this game Two quadruped thingies that are basically the same animation set go at it Like what is it?  Yeah, look at this and now it's my turn because I've got a lot of attack I removed as a speeding reserve. Oh, yeah Everything's evenly matched. Yeah, this is a close game. Um Right now. What could he do here? He could go for Oh, that's enough So unfair, bud.    He's probably gonna go for his group accelerating Not go for his nullifying. I don't think he's gonna go for that. He's gonna save that that was him. I'd save that Yes, so I'm still actually faster than him. Oh if he'd went for his nullifying. Oh, that's annoying If he'd just done that he would have probably killed me there so I'm just gonna go for the toxic wheels because Even if he swaps out I'm gonna do a load damage to something Oh, yeah, I'm doing a lot of damage to ceramite. That's interesting.  Oh, you hate to see it. No chance of a crit though So Could be worse. Uh, how much bleed damage do we do because we could oh, we could wait.  Well, what could he do? Even if he goes for his precise.  So I have to do this then Yeah, I have to do this Okay, we're keeping scorpious rocks alive.  I don't know. Yeah, okay I would just went for precise Okay Because then I can oh, yeah, I can just swap the paratops now Uh, yeah, I'll swap the paratops. I suppose Yeah, sure. Let's swap out And then his gorgor trabex will come in Uh, probably go for a speed increase Um, but at that point if that's what happens Referendum's gonna come in and do priority and kill him. That's that's the play where one move ahead of him.  That's the problem and the fun from darling the dinosaurs Like that's not part of the game I feel like that's just kind of like if you if you're going out collecting dinosaurs all more power to you But majority of the time this this is for someone who you know comes in after work and just like sits down Collecting your payers does battles and then goes to bed. That's pretty much a really sad feel where someone goes like Oh, let's go out for a walk And you can't do some bell. So yeah, it'll be interesting to see what he swaps into here. Oh, it's monorino Oh interesting. I think he's dead. I think he's dead. Yeah, I think he's lost Maybe not You know what fair play fair play I'll go for this one go for this one. Um Okay, well, there's the crit I suppose Here comes his shield Um, what I need to do. I need to be careful here. Um Actually, do I need to be careful? I don't even think I need to be careful. I don't need to be careful I was thinking what if gorgotrex comes in and I he's quicker than me, but even if he does Like well, what's gonna happen? He gets hit and dies Yeah, I think I pretty much won this one. I think and then the biggest hit I'll give him like well played I I either got lucky or I didn't definitely cut even with a shield. Yeah, well that's pretty well That was a good game. That was so like Oh, that was good. That was good. I mean, I had like maybe the more powerful dinosaurs because they're loads of the Moray pegs But still that was good. So if you join this video guys label like it until next time Well, I'll be back when regs you get to think you better or you know, the update comes out or something We're always back for something. So till then stay safe beauties. Bye. Bye


We're streaming now. Should be live. Give it just a second. Okay, settings are active. Good, all right. That should do it. We're live, great. Okay, welcome in everyone to the second talk of the day. Without much further ado, continuing a bit our digital humanities methods block. I'm really excited to see this. This is a very cool idea. I'm really interested to see how this unfolds. So this we have with us Eugenio Petrovich from the University of Siena, who will be talking about acknowledgments, co-mention networks as a new method for mapping the social structure of scholarly fields. So please take it away. Hey, thank you very much, Charles, and hello everybody. Thank you for attending this virtual talk. And thanks to Charles and Luca for organizing this very inspirational, let me say, workshop. And today, my contribution focuses on the acknowledgments of academic publications and how they can be used to map the social structure of a science of scholarly fields more generally. So let me start by a brief outline of the presentation. And I'll begin by sketching a schematic picture of what we may call the multi-layer structure of science. And I will briefly overview the main techniques that have been developed in scientific metrics and some science mapping to map the intellectual structure of science. And then I will focus on the main method that is used to map the social structure of science, namely co-authorship analysis. And in particular, I will review some well-known limitations of this method that is based on multi-authored publications. Then I will introduce the acknowledgments of academic publications as a complementary data source that can supplement the analysis of co-authorship. And in particular, I will present you the concept of acknowledgments co-mentioned network or ACM networks in short. Then in the third section of the talk, I will test this new method for mapping the social structure on the era of analytic philosophy that, as you probably know, is one of the main tradition of contemporary philosophy. And we'll present you the methodology I followed for generating the ACM network. And then the results I obtained. And in particular, I will focus on a comparison between the social and intellectual structure of analytic philosophy. Based on the results of this case study, I will discuss a little bit in the fourth part of the talk, the advantages and issues of acknowledgments analysis in ACM network. And lastly, I will conclude by sketching some further steps in this research. Okay, so let's start by what I call the multi-layer structure of science. Science and scholarship more generally are complex multi-dimensional phenomena that can be analyzed from various perspectives. From an analytical point of view, we can first distinguish an intellectual layer of science that is the layer of the epistemic content of science. When we describe the scientific field in terms of research areas, topics or knowledge domains, basically we are focusing on this specific level. However, as sociologists of science and philosophers of scientific practice know well, the intellectual layer does not exist in a social vacuum. In fact, scientific ideas are embedded in a complex social network made of scientists, scientific institutions, grant agencies, and so on. All these diverse actors constitute the social layer of science. Now, in between the intellectual and social layer, a key role is played by the communication system of science. That is the system made of publications and journals by which scientists and scholars communicate and exchange scientific information. Now, the key idea on which scientific and science mappings are based is that from the traces left, so to say, by scientists in their communication system, we can reconstruct both the intellectual layer of science and the underlying social structure. Now, as to the intellectual layer, several techniques have been developed in the last decades by scientometricians and experts in science mapping. The three main techniques are co-citation analysis in which the intellectual similarity between publications is determined based on the number of times they are cited together in the scientific literature. The basic idea behind co-citation analysis is that the more two publications appear together in other articles, the higher the probability that they belong to the same topic. Then we have bibliographic coupling that in a certain sense is the reverse of co-citation. In bibliographic coupling, the intellectual similarity between publication is determined by the overlap in the bibliographies of publications. Again, the idea is that the more references two publications share, the more they are closed in the intellectual content. And lastly, we have co-word analysis. This time, the intellectual structure is reconstructed by mapping the terms that mostly occur together in the titles or abstracts of publications. Now, as to the social structure of science, however, science mapping offers a less rich toolbox. In fact, the main method that has been used that is used is co-authorship analysis. In this type of analysis, the social relationships between researchers are reconstructed based on the publications they write together. The idea is that scientists frequently writing publications together are likely to belong to the same invisible college that is those active scientific groups that form the basic unit of the social structure of science. However, this type of analysis that is based on these formal collaboration patterns expressed by co-authorship suffers from some well-known limitations related to the practice of authorship in science and scholarship. First, it is well known that authors contribute differently to publications. Usually some of the authors are more involved in experiments, analysis, and writing, whereas others play a less prominent role. To account for these differences, some disciplines such as biological sciences rely on the order of authors, whereas some journals use specific taxonomies that allow each author to specify their contribution to research. These innovations such as the credit system may partly solve the issue of waiting the contributions of the authors. Nonetheless, some more practices such as the so-called gift authorship may still not be detected. Gift authorships are given to influential scientists for purely honorary reasons and clearly artificially increase the weight and centrality of these researchers in the co-authorship network. On the other hand, the opposite of gift authorships are ghost authorships that occur when the contribution of some authors is not recognized. In this way, they remain invisible to co-authorship analysis. Similarly, the authors list may not include all those that actually collaborated to the research process. As a sociological research as shown, not all scientific contributions result into co-authorship of papers. Laboratory technicians, for instance, are rarely included in the authors list. Sometimes even the work of graduate students is not awarded with the authorship. A further phenomenon that complicates the use of co-authorship analysis is the so-called hyper authorship. In fields such as high energy physics, publications resulting from larger scale experiments may list thousands of authors. The paper that reported the discovery of the Higgs boson, for instance, counted more than 5,000 of authors. In social sciences and humanities, we observe in a certain sense the opposite phenomenon because co-authorship is scarcely diffused in these areas. However, the lack of co-authorships does not mean that scholars in social sciences and humanities do not collaborate. In fact, they informally collaborate with many colleagues and the rate of collaboration is similar to that of their colleagues in natural sciences. Still, since these collaborations are not recorded in the authors list of the publications, they remain invisible to co-authorship analysis. With the results that co-authorship networks in the humanities are too sparse to be truly informative as the instance on the right side of the slide shows. As you can see, most of the notes in the network are isolated with only few chains of co-authors appearing in the lower part of the graph. In the light of these shortcomings of co-authorship analysis, scholars in library information sciences have proposed to focus on the acknowledgments of scientific publications to gain a richer picture of collaboration ties in the scientific community. The idea is simple to switch the focus from the byline of the articles, that is the authors list, to the acknowledgement sections of publications. Even first glance at these texts already reveals that they are a very rich source of data about informal collaboration patterns and more generally the social context that surrounds academic articles. As you can see from the example on the screen that is taken from an article in economics, the acknowledgments mention several persons that contributed in various ways to the article, the so-called acknowledges. These mentions allows us not only to reconstruct informal collaboration patterns, but also to find out who are the persons that are most influential in a field by counting how many times they are mentioned in the acknowledgments. However, the acknowledgments shed light also on the institution that provide financial support to the research and lastly, on the conferences and meetings where research is discussed. In some of the acknowledgments are a very interesting source of data for sociological investigation on the social structure of science. Now, in this talk, I will present you a method to analyze some of the information contained in the acknowledgments in order to gain a new insights on the social structure of science. The idea is to model the acknowledgement data as a two-mode network made of articles here on the left and acknowledges here on the right. Then these notes are linked together by the relation of mentioning that these the article notes are connected with the acknowledges notes when the former mentioned the latter. From this two-mode network, we can generate a one-mode network where only the acknowledges notes appear using the method of biographic coupling. That these two acknowledges are connected when they are mentioned together in the same acknowledgments. In this case, for instance, the acknowledges A and B are linked together because they are commensioned in paper one. Similarly, acknowledges A and B and C are connected because they appear together in paper two and acknowledges C and B are linked because they appear together in paper number three. And lastly, we attribute a weight to the links between acknowledges based on the number of papers in which they're mentioned together. So in this case, acknowledges A and B share a link of weight two because they're mentioned together in two papers, namely paper one and paper two. In this way, we have generated the Analogy Pro-Mention Network or ACM network in short. Clearly this network can be partly analyzed using standard tools of network analysis such as centrality measures and arguing for detection of communities. Now, so far I have delineated the general concept of ACM network. However, to better assess the viability and potential interest of this method, I tested it on a humanities area that is analytic philosophy. And in this section of the talk, I will present to you the results of these experiments. Before passing the results, however, let me quickly summarize you the three reasons for choosing analytic philosophy as a case study. First, previous studies have shown that the percentage of articles in analytic philosophy that feature an acknowledgement is quite high. For instance, in 1990, 94% of the articles in mind featured an acknowledgement. Second, the intellectual structure of analytic philosophy has already been mapped with co-citation analysis. Therefore, we have material for comparison between the intellectual and social layers of the field. And lastly, analytic philosophy stands as a good representative of humanities areas more generally. So testing ACM network on it may be useful to assess the viability of the method for other areas in the humanities and maybe social sciences. On this slide, you can see a brief overview of the corpus I used in the analysis. It comprises 2,073 articles published in five of the most prestigious journals of analytic philosophy, a philosophical review, journal of philosophy, mind, noose and philosophy and phenomenological research. The articles span over a period of 15 years from 2005 to 2019. So we have to do with the recent analytical philosophy. To generate the ACM network, I implemented a procedure made of several steps. First, I collected the full text of the 2000s and more articles from which I extracted manually the acknowledgement sections. Note that the place of the acknowledgments in the text is not fixed but changes over time and by journal. Sometimes they are placed in the first note of the article, sometimes in the last, sometimes there is an acknowledgement section and so on. So the problem is that no automatic procedure for extracting the strings of text was possible. I had to manually collect each acknowledgement text which is, as you can imagine, quite a time-consuming operation. However, once each string of text was collected, I automatically extracted the names of the acknowledges from them and this was done by using a named entity recognition module of Spacy that is a Python package for natural language processing and in particular name entity recognition utility is able to recognize named entities from strings and classify them in several categories including persons, organizations, companies and locations. However, the data produced by this system could not be used in the raw form because of two main problems. First, the acknowledgments are frequently written in an informal style and diminutives are used instead of the full form of names. So these names variants must be reduced to standard forms in order to produce reliable results. Hence, a first step in the data cleaning was the merging of variants. Again, this was a quite time-consuming operation. And secondly, sometimes the algorithm for named entity recognition makes errors in the categorization of entities producing both false negatives and false positives that must be corrected manually. After this quite long process of data cleaning, the final dataset was characterized by the following statistics. 94% of the articles in the corpus feature unacknowledgments. The 2000 articles are written by 1,391 distinct authors that mention 5,774 distinct acknowledges. The maximum number of acknowledges mentioned in one paper is 72, quite high number, but 127 articles mention only one analogy. In fact, the average article mentioned 8.3 analogies but there is a great variability in the number of acknowledges per paper as the high standard deviation shows. Interestingly, the average number of authors per paper is significantly lower with only 1.2 authors per paper and only 12% of the papers have more than one author. The statistics confirm that co-authorship is scarcely practiced in analytic philosophy. And let me say as a side note to the presentation that I present and discuss more statistical analysis of this data in an article that should appear in a special issue of logic analysis. So if you're interested in the print, please write me and I will share it with you. Coming back to your presentation, we see in this slide how the low incidence of co-authorship renders co-authorship analysis quite useless for these corpus. As you can see, the network is too sparse for bringing truly informative about the social structure of analytic philosophy as 70% of the authors in the corpus are isolated. The ACM network on the other hand is more informative and interesting to explain. And as you can see it in this slide, in this map that is produced with a software VOS viewer the acknowledges with 10 mentions or more in the corpus are represented with their mutual co-mention relations. In the visualization, the size of the nodes is proportional to the number of mentions an analogies receives, whereas the relative positions of the nodes reflect the co-mention similarities. So that two analogies that are frequently mentioned together in the corpus are placed closer on the map. Lastly, the color of the nodes represents the cluster they're attributed to by the community detection algorithm of VOS viewer. As you can see the ACM network is quite tight with the highly mentioned acknowledges such as David Chalmers and Timothy Williamson placed at the center of the map. Now the community detection algorithm integrates five main clusters which interestingly can be mapped to some sub areas of analytic philosophy. For instance, the red cluster hosts several metaphysicians, the blue clusters philosophers of mine, the green cluster philosophers specialized in ethics and moral philosophy, the violet cluster philosophers of language and several formal epistemologists. Note, however, that the association between philosophical areas and clusters is somehow weakened by the fact that epistemologists are found in all clusters. And this seems to indicate a special role for epistemology in recent analytic philosophy. If we move now to a map of the intellectual structure of analytic philosophy, you can see it on the screen. The second map is generated with co-citation analysis and is based on the same corpus of articles analyzed before. This time, however, the notes represent the references cited in the bibliographies of the articles. The more two references are cited together in the bibliographies, the more they are cut close on the map. Again, the size of the notes corresponds to the citations received by references in the corpus whereas the color is attributed based on the community direction algorithm. Co-citation network like this are useful to reconstruct the structure of the knowledge base of scholarly fields. And in fact, the cluster can be easily mapped to the sub-disciplines of analytic philosophy. The red cluster corresponds to metaphysics, the violet to philosophy of language, the blue to philosophy of mind and the green to moral philosophy. These clusters almost match those we found in the ACM network, but with a notable difference. Epistemology here is represented by a specific cluster. Whereas in the previous network, it was so to say spread all over the clusters. If we compare now the social and intellectual structure that is the network based on the analogies co-manages on the left and the network based on the references, co-citations on the right, we can note how the former is somehow denser than the latter. And this is confirmed at the quantitative level by the statistics of modularity. That is a network statistic that measures how much network is divided into sub-communities. Networks with a high modularity have dense connections between the nodes within clusters, but sparse connection between nodes in different clusters. As you can see on the slide, the ACM network has a lower modularity compared to the co-citation network. Confirming the qualitative impression of higher density we had by inspecting visually the maps. The four based on these results, we can argue that the social structure of analytic philosophy is somehow more interconnected than its intellectual structure. That is that differentiation into philosophical sub-disciplines is more pronounced at the intellectual than at the social level. Another important difference between the two networks is their temporal focus. The ACM network captures the present social structure of analytic philosophy. All the acknowledges that appear in it are in fact active members of the analytic philosophy community. In the sense, the number of mentions they receive reflect their contemporary prestige or symbolic capital in the community to use some sociological concepts. The co-citation network on the other hand focuses on the past as it captures the knowledge base of the discipline. Several of the authors with a high number of citations that appear in this second network, such as David Lewis, for instance, are no more active members of the analytic community because they are that. The fact that different philosophers appear in the two networks tells us that the distribution of prestige does not coincide with the distribution of intellectual capital. That is that the social intellectual layer do not totally coincide. This difference is confirmed if we look at the distribution of mentions and citations shown respectively on the plots on the left and on the right of the site. These plots tell us, to say simply, how much the distribution of a variable in the population represented by the red line deviates from perfect equality, which is represented by the line at 45 degrees. From these plots that are called Lorentz-Turk, we can say, for instance, that the bottom 60% acknowledges receives only 20% of these Lorentz-Turk mentions. Now, as you can see, the distribution of mentions is more distanced from the line of perfect equality than the distribution of citations. A measure of this distance is the genicoefficient, which is a measure derived from this Lorentz curve that quantifies inequality. As you can see, the genicoefficient is a higher for the mentions distribution than for the citations distribution, showing that the symbolic capital is more concentrated in a smaller segment of the acknowledges population than intellectual capital. Okay, so let us now take stock of this quite long journey in the acknowledgments of academic publications. I hope to show you that the acknowledgments analysis and the ACM network are useful methods for investigating the social structure of squaring fields. However, we should point out both its advantages and disadvantages. The first advantage of the method is that it's more effective than co-authorship analysis for tracing the social structure of areas in the social sciences and humanities, as I think it should be clear now. The second advantage is that it allows to consider informal collaboration that remain invisible to co-authorship analysis. It can therefore integrate effectively this type of analysis. However, there are two main issues that make the method difficult to implement in practice. First, there is no acknowledgement index as there are citation indexes like Web of Science or SCOPUS. The extraction of acknowledgement texts from publication is therefore a very time-consuming operation. I must add, however, that in the last years both Web of Science and SCOPUS have started to collect the acknowledgments texts of academic publications. Unfortunately, however, they consider only those acknowledgments where financial support is mentioned. This is done for the funders, basically. However, in the case of humanities, the portion of acknowledgments that mention funding is only a small portion of the acknowledgments. Therefore, for the moment, there is no easy way out from manual data collection. And the second big issue is the huge amount of data cleaning that is needed to consolidate the raw data. As we have seen before, the same person is mentioned with several variants that must be normalized to produce reliable statistics. And the naming and recognition algorithm make mistakes that must be corrected. Also, this operation is very time-consuming and difficult to scale up. Okay, so let me now conclude with some further step in the research that I'd like to perform. So the idea is to basically integrate intellectual and social similarity, starting from a three-mode network like the one you see on the slide. And this network, there are articles that cite references on the left and mention homologies on the right. The idea is that from this network, we can derive two new networks, the first based on bibliographic coupling in which publications are linked together when there is an overlap in their references, in the references they mention. So this is the first network that allows you to reconstruct the intellectual similarity between publication. The other network is the opposite of the analogies convention network and we may call it the analogies coupling network. In it, two publications are linked together when they mention the same analogies and the weight of the link is equal to the number of analogies they share. Now, the idea is that these two networks that rest upon the same sets of nodes can be fused by the new techniques of network fusion that allows you to, you know, match and fuse the edges in the social similarity network and in the intellectual similarity network. However, I still have to perform this analysis. So for the moment, I do not know if the results will be interesting or could be somehow interpreted. However, I hope to show you that these methods based on an advance can be thoroughly integrated with other already known methods in science mapping to have a richer picture of the social intellectual structure of scholarly fields. I have to conclude now. Thank you very much for your attention and please feel free to contact me at these addresses. Thank you. Great. Thank you so much. Very, very cool stuff. Yeah, I'm excited to see where this goes, hopefully. And in all, at the amount of data cleaning that you had to do, that's very impressive. Let me go to the questions now. First, I have a question coming in from Catherine Herfeld who asks, so given that acknowledgments can signal very different kinds of relations and you mentioned this near the end with respect to the scope of state of like funding or feedback or what have you, have you thought about a way to distinguish different kinds of acknowledgments, relations and maybe categorize them or think about their relationships? Yeah, thank you very much. This is a very key question in the analysis of your knowledge. And so from a certain point of view, we have the same issues we have with co-authorship analysis because we have a text that mentioned a bunch of persons and it's difficult to reconstruct a posteriori what were the contributions of each of these persons. Sometimes the authors explicitly say what is the contribution. So for instance, they thank someone for such assistance or for feedback. But sometimes you have only lists of names, basically. I am gratefully acknowledge the help of X, epsilon and Z. And in this case, I think that you just cannot reconstruct what were the contribution. But maybe by performing some advanced text analysis methods we can link somehow the names to some keywords. What I've done in the work I mentioned that should be appeared in a logic analysis was to analyze what were the main, the most frequent keywords that appear in an argument text. And this relates all to gratefulness to thanking people. So it appears that at least in late philosophy the most frequent contribution is a sort of intellectual feedback that people gave. But clearly there is no experiments or no laboratory activity. For instance, in biological sciences, people are thanked also for contributing with samples, for instance, or with statistical analysis. And so for the sciences, it's more rich, the information because it depends on the kind of research practices that they're buying a field. Sure, yeah, that makes a lot of sense, thanks. Another question coming in from Rose Trappes who asks so is there any sociological research that's been done on how people decide who to include in the acknowledgment? So I'm wondering if those acknowledged actually have more social capital in the field or if they just give comments on heaps of drafts. Yeah, so in the field of the sociology of science there are not so many studies focusing on arrangements but in library information sciences there are plenty of them. The main author here is Blaise Cronin that is one of the greatest scholars in library information science and he has basically developed the field of acknowledgments studies. And yeah, so let me say this, in information library sciences, there is a sort of naive approach to acknowledgments so that they are taken at face value. So as a science of informal collaborations. But it's true that for instance, people that has studied acknowledgments in economics thinks that people are mentioned for strategic reasons, for instance to influence the editors in the choice of the reviewers. So there is this idea of cite your friend and mentioning the acknowledgments your foe so that the editor would not choose it as a reviewer. But still there is not so much research on this. I'm trying in another research to find out if there are some quantitative tests that can say to us whether mentions are given because of the social capital or the intellectual contribution of people. And there are not easy tests, but for instance, the great, the skewed distribution of mention that is the fact that few people receive lots of mentions, whereas most of people is only one mention, this is a sign that maybe a cumulative advantage mechanism is working so that prestige has a role in who are the people that are mentioned. And the idea is that sometimes you can signal that you are acquainted with the great scholars in your field to show that you are the right person, that your paper maybe is more important to read or cite. Sure, yeah, that actually connects to, so I'll take chairs prerogative here and ask my own question, even though I didn't get a chance to type it into the box. That relates to a question that I had. So I wonder, yeah, I wonder whether, so there's a number of competing hypotheses, right, that you might envision for what's driving someone being central in a central node in this network. And so like I was thinking for instance of, on the one hand we have sort of people with a lot of social capital or prestige so it's important to impress, but on the other we have something that actually stood out to me from a couple of the names that were central in the network that you showed everyone. Having a lot of visiting positions or running an institute or something, the kinds of things where like, if you're the kind of person who does the kinds of things that you get a lot of people around you all the time that you can tend to bubble up. So I saw in there a couple of names people who I know have big collaborative groups always have a bunch of rotating scholar positions in their community. So I wonder if you've thought about evaluating, I mean, evaluating those hypotheses isn't easy. It's almost a sociological question. I'm just kind of interested to know what your thoughts are because I'm sure you've been thinking about that question. So basically all these issues or questions that are about the process behind the generation of mentions, okay. These are really crucial in the studies of acknowledgements and I think they are very good because in all the quantitative studies we do in digital humanities because sometimes we take the data at face value whereas there are many hypotheses behind their, how they are generated, especially when we study things that are produced by people like mentions and acknowledgements but also words and texts that are used in topic modeling. So the reason why it's very complex social reality behind these products and this is where social epistemology or philosophical scientific practice and social studies of science, they come in. And I think that sometimes the only way to rule out what is the best explanation to find out what is the best explanation is to supplement the quantitative analysis with some qualitative analysis. So asking people, doing interviews, doing some ethnographic research in the communities and clearly there is also expert or task knowledge that these people in the field clearly know some dynamics that from an external point of view are not feasible when you just inspect the network. At the same time I must stress that also these qualitative methods have some issues because for instance, if you interview people sometimes they cannot be very sincere in what are their motivations or they just cannot remember why did they mention that person? So there are always issues. I think that integrating qualitative and quantitative can somehow provide you a richer insight. From the quantitative point of view, what I tried to do was to collect several information, several data about each of them. For instance, the number of citations they get in the web of science or the number of publications or if they are working in English speaking institutions on and they run a multivariate regression analysis model. And from this kind of analysis you can see correlations between variables. And for instance, it appears that in this corpus being affiliated with an English speaking institution give you a sort of bonus in the number of mentions. So it's more likely to receive higher mention if you work in the US or in the Australia or UK. Well, we all know that analytical philosophy is mainly based in the English speaking world. So maybe this is not unexpected but at the same time we have the quantitative, we can quantify measures so to say the effect of the English speaking focus of the community. Sure, yeah, that's really nice, thanks. I don't have another one of the box so I'm gonna help myself again. I wanted to ask about these network fusion methods that you mentioned right near the end. I know that that may be sort of cutting edge stuff for you so I don't wanna put you on the spot if you don't really wanna go into it but I haven't really run across these yet and I wonder what kinds of networks do you expect to get? So how does that process really work exactly? What do you start to see when you think about sort of mixing these networks together? That's something that I've ever really considered. Well, let me say that I don't have a clue about it because I still perform and actually to study that the packages that have been produced to this natural fusion technique that is very recent. I think that the papers in nature about it are coming really in these recent years. So what I know is that my supervisor in Siena actually have worked on the fusion of network of journal networks where the two networks that were refused were the consultation network of the journals and the network based on the editorial overlap. The overlap on the editorial board of journals. Okay, so again, a measure of intellectual similarity and a measure of social similarity. And the results are very good because the two network have a very similar structure. So it seems that the fusion actually provided with this cluster is social intellectual clusters so that the two, the intellectual and social dynamics seem to go in the same direction. So we would like to reproduce these kind of analysis for analytical philosophy and also for economics. I would like to test the results if there are... But for the moment, I must say that I have no idea. Cool, yeah, no, that's a good answer. That's totally fine. It just sounds really neat, I agree with you. I think that's something to be fun to pursue. Question from Chris of Malateru asks, which is a very cool way to derive social networks. Did you think about comparing the ACM networks to networks derived from topic modeling? So he says on our corpus, we conducted a proof of concept for generating social networks on the basis of shared topical distributions in articles. And the same thing could be done on your corpus, I guess, but require having ideally access to the full text or at least to abstract. So I'm not sure what you have in that sense in your corpus. Yeah, so in my particular corpus, I have only the classic metadata. So I have titles and abstracts that I think are not enough for topic modeling. So actually when I extracted the acknowledgement text, I had to access the full text, but I could not download all these texts for bigger reasons. And so this is for the practical side. From the methodological theoretical point of view, that would be definitely very interesting because this idea of integrating, so again, I always speak in terms of layers, but we know it's just an analytical image. There's various dimensions of the research enterprise that is the level of ideas, so to say the level of topics with a level of the persons that embodies, so to say this idea. I think this is very interesting. And also for any history of science that they are doing these, there are very interesting work on, for instance, the history of general relativity, where they try to mix all these networks based on citations, based on working on same institution, participating in the same conferences. People at the Max Planck Institute in Berlin are doing these. So I think that many enterprises, similar enterprises are performed now in very different areas. And I think one of the most important things to do is to talk to each other, like this conference is doing. So, well, yeah, I'd really like to do that. At the moment it's not in the plan, but in the future, yes. I actually was slated to go do a research stay at the Max Planck in Berlin. It was canceled to COVID. So yes, I think talking to each other, I know the feeling, hopefully it will be able to have more opportunities to do that as things start to get back to normal. Thanks, let me see just real quick, if there's anything else that's come into the Q&A box. You would have time for maybe one more quick question if somebody wants to throw something in. I'll just stall for a few seconds to let the tape delay catch up. This is all fancy stalling tactics. At some point the audience is going to start realizing when I'm filling time. But no, this is just a moment. Well, if there's not any further questions, we're very close to time now. So let me go ahead and stop it there. Thanks so much, it's very cool talk and really appreciate it. We will be back in with a 10 minute break now. So a 10 minute pause and we'll be back with the next talk shortly. Thanks very much.