UVA Data Points

This bonus episode features a conversation between Lane Rasberry, Wikimedian-In-Residence at the UVA School of Data Science, and Lloyd Sy, a Ph.D. candidate in the UVA Department of English. In this conversation, Lane and Lloyd take a deep dive into the expansive world of Wikidata and ask the existential question, "What makes a person a person?" Or, more specifically, what data points make up a person? To help answer this question, Lloyd developed a large-scale data model of the biographical data contained within the Wikidata platform. This project serves as the foundation for their conversation. They also take a wide view of biographical data as it pertains to research and academia, including the process of gathering the data, the ethics of utilizing the data, personal ownership of the data, and much more. Anyone interested in these concepts should find this discussion valuable.

Links:

WikiProject Biography

Music:

"Screen Saver" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Data science is an incredibly diverse and global field of study and practice. In order to tackle some of our most challenging issues ranging from climate change to cognition, we need data and data scientists from all over the world to make advances in research, technology and innovation. To talk about their research interests and the importance of having diverse, global perspectives in the field of data science, this episode of UVA Data Points features a conversation by Javier Rasero, Assistant Professor of Data Science, and two University of Virginia data science students: Marco Gutiérrez Chavezis a first-year Ph.D. student from Peru and Mercedes Mora-Figueroa de Liñán is an M.S. in Data Science student from Spain.

This episode features a conversation between Lane Rasberry, Wikimedia-in-Residence at the University of Virginia School of Data Science, and Virginia Eubanks, author, journalist, and associate professor of political science at the University at Albany.

The conversation was recorded in 2019 but the topics are still relevant today. Eubanks looks toward the future, warning of the unintended—or at times intended—consequences of emerging technologies. The discussion focuses on the effects of algorithmic automation, as well as the practice, policies, and implementation of these algorithms. Although she critiques the tech world, Eubanks also provides many reasons for optimism.

Virginia Eubanks authored the 2018 book Automating Inequality, which is a detailed investigation into data-based discrimination. She is also the author of Digital Dead End: Fighting for Social Justice in the Information Age and the co-editor, with Alethia Jones, of Ain’t Gonna Let Nobody Turn Me Around: Forty Years of Movement Building with Barbara Smith. She also writes for various outlets, including the Guardian, American Scientist, and the New York Times. Recently, Virginia began the PTSD Bookclub, an ongoing project that explores books about trauma and its aftermath. You can find this project and Virginia Eubank’s other projects at virginia-eubanks.com.

This episode was recorded during the Miller Center’s 2023 William and Carol Stevenson Conference, U.S. China Tech Competiton: Has Democracy Met its Match?

For more info on this conference, as well as to watch the video versions, follow this link: https://millercenter.org/news-events/events/us-china-tech-competition-has-democracy-met-its-match

This episode features the first panel discussion from the conference entitled:

Apps, platforms, and surveillance

How might apps and other technology platforms play a role in Chinese government data-gathering efforts? What are potential policy responses to the increasingly complex data flows between the United States and China? This panel addresses the long-term stability of U.S. technology infrastructure and related concerns for U.S. national security.

Josh Chin, Kara Frederick, Shanthi Kalathil, Aynne Kokas (moderator)

Before diving into the complex world of data science it seemed to wise to establish a shared definition of the field. Here at the UVA School of Data Science, we have defined data science with the 4 + 1 Model. This model serves an outline for the first series of UVA Data Points. It also serves as a guiding definition within the School of Data Science, touching everything from research to course planning.

In this introduction trailer, host Monica Manney discusses the history, development, and function of the 4 + 1 Model of Data Science with its main author, Raf Alvarado.

Below is a brief expect from An Outline of the 4 + 1 Model of Data Science by Raf Alvarado:

“The point of the 4 + 1 model, abstract as it is, is to provide a practical template for strategically planning the various elements of a school of data science. To serve as an effective template, a model must be general. But generality if often purchased at the cost of intuitive understanding. The following caveats may help make sense of the model when considering its usefulness when applied to various concrete activities.

The model describes areas of academic expertise, not objective reality. It is a map of a division of labor writ large. Although each of the areas has clear connections to the others, the question to ask when deciding where an activity belongs is: who would be an expert at doing it? The realms help refine this question: the analytics area, for example, contains people who are good at working with abstract machinery. The four areas have the virtue of isolating intuitively correct communities of expertise. For example, people who are great at data product design may not know the esoteric depths of machine learning, and that adepts at machine learning are not usually experts in understanding human society and normative culture.

Each area in the model contains a collection of subfields that need to be teased out. Some areas will have more subfields than others. Although some areas may be smaller than others in terms of number of experts (faculty) and courses, each area has a major impact on the overall practice of data science and the quality of the school’s activities. In addition, these subfields are in an important sense “more real” than the categories. We can imagine them forming a dense network in which the areas define communities with centroids, and which are more interconnected than the clean-cut image of the model implies.

The areas of the model are like the components of a principal component analysis of the vector space of data science. They capture the variance that exists within the field, and, crucially, provide a framework for realigning (rebasing) the academy along a new set of axes. One effect of this is to both disperse and recombine older fields, such as computer science, statistics, and operations research, into new clusters. Thus we separate computer science subfields such as complexity analysis and database design. One possible salutary result of this will be the formation of new syntheses of fields that share concerns but differ in vocabularies and customs..."