News

Guy De Pauw at METAforum

Guy De Pauw will present CLiPS' tech transfer plans towards a spin-off company at the METAforum 2013 conference in Berlin, Germany. His talk connects to the special theme of the conference on Big Data Text Analytics.

Automatic Compound Processing in Afrikaans and in Dutch

in

On October 2nd, Ben Verhoeven will be giving an informal talk about his research on automatic compound processing in Dutch and Afrikaans. For all practical information, and to sign up, please follow this link.

Interview with Walter Daelemans in Taalschrift

Taalschrift, a magazine from the Dutch Language Union, recently published an interview with Walter Daelemans on CLiPS' work in stylometry.

The article (in Dutch) can be found here: http://taalschrift.org/editie/99/schrijf-en-u-wordt-ontmaskerd

Mike Kestemont teaches summer school on Digital Humanities in Göttingen

Mike Kestemont is currently teaching a full-week Summer School on Digital Humanities at the University of Göttingen, together with Lars Wieneke from the CVCE in Luxemburg.

CLiPS member Mike Kestemont makes stylometry documentary!

At the recent Digital Humanities Conference (2013, University of Lincoln-Nebrasbra, USA) a paper was presented of which CLiPS member Mike Kestemont was the lead author: ‘Collaborative Authorship in the Twelfth Century. A Stylometric Study of Hildegard of Bingen and Guibert of Gembloux’.

Job Openings at CLiPS

CLiPS is looking for two new doctoral students!

Ben Verhoeven at ICWSM and WCPR

in

Ben Verhoeven is in Boston to represent CLiPS at the International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM), which is this year organised at MIT on 8-10 July.

Research visit by Gerhard van Huyssteen

in

Prof. Gerhard van Huyssteen (North-West University, South-Africa) is on a three-week research visit at CLiPS to work with Prof. Walter Daelemans and Ben Verhoeven on the AuCoPro project.

Positive research evaluation for CLiPS.

In a recent research evaluation, CLiPS received very high marks: three times the maximum score of 5 (excellent) for scientific quality, productivity and relevance, and a high score of 4.5 (very good - excellent) for viability.