http://hdl.handle.net/2451/42230 2026-08-20T19:53:02Z http://hdl.handle.net/2451/75857 Title: Transcribing Machines: HTR as a Question of Critical AI Authors: Wrisley, David Joseph Abstract: This talk examines Handwritten Text Recognition (HTR) not as a neutral tool of transcription, but as a site where salient debates of Critical AI emerge. HTR, it has been argued, is perhaps the most successful form of AI introduced into the archive (Neudecker). Yet, while it promises scaled access to the handwritten unread, it also unsettles traditional scholarly authority, raising fundamental questions about who produces and standardizes the creation of searchable text. Drawing on multilingual, multi-community experiences with HTR, I argue that while these systems open up important critical perspectives in the computational study of texts, they also reshape authority and expertise under which documentary knowledge is produced. One of the central questions of this talk is whether the humanities community is treating automated transcription too simply as a technical problem, while overlooking forms of extraction hidden beneath promises of access. Training corpora—often drawn from wealthy institutions of the Global North—privilege certain scripts, languages, and archival traditions, making the question of whose data and models are centered a critical one. As HTR transforms select handwritten materials into searchable corpora–readable by both humans and machines–it also runs the risk of deepening the gap between well-resourced textual traditions and those whose scripts or archival conditions remain difficult to computationally process. These inequalities are not merely technical, but they shape the conditions under which the past can be discovered and known. Taken together, these tensions point toward a larger question about the future of HTR on which we can only speculate: will it remain shaped by scholarly commitments to transparency and context, or increasingly by AI infrastructures designed for scalability and generalized results? Automation may eliminate some older scholarly practices (Dubreuil) such as manual transcription, but it may also compel the humanities to focus more strongly on critical questions of systems, infrastructure, and methodological inclusivity. 2026-06-12T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/2451/75853 Title: The value of strategic unpredictability: A natural experiment from baseball Authors: Chernulich, Aleksei; Gauriot, Romain; Wooders, John Abstract: Strategic situations in which decision-makers need to be unpredictable are common. This paper introduces a measure of the value of strategic unpredictability for a player and shows that it determines (i) the player’s incentive to follow equilibrium and (ii) the power of statistical tests of whether the player’s opponent follows their equilibrium mixture. We use data from a unique natural experiment in Major League Baseball to estimate the value of strategic unpredictability for pitchers. We find that the Houston Astros gained a significant advantage by stealing opposing teams’ signs, thereby reducing opposing pitchers’ ability to be unpredictable. 2026-06-30T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/2451/75852 Title: The institutional determinants of Southern secession Authors: Chacon, Mario; Jensen, Jeffrey Abstract: We use the Southern secession movement of 1860-1861 to study how elites in democracy enact their preferred policies. Most states used specially convened conventions to determine whether or not to secede from the Union. We argue that although the delegates of these conventions were popularly elected, the electoral rules favored slaveholders. Using an original dataset of representation in each convention, we first demonstrate that slave-intensive districts were systematically overrepresented. Slaveholders were also spatially concentrated and could thereby obtain local pluralities in favor of secession more easily. As a result of these electoral biases, less than 10% of the electorate was sufficient to elect a majority of delegates in four of the six original Confederate states. We also show how delegates representing slave-intensive counties were more likely to support secession. These factors explain the disproportionate influence of slaveholders during the crisis and why secessionists strategically chose conventions over statewide referenda. 2017-03-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/2451/75851 Title: Class structure and inequality during the Industrial Revolution: Lessons from England’s social tables, 1688-1867 Authors: Allen, Robert C. Abstract: This paper measures the size and incomes of six major social classes across the Industrial Revolution using social tables for England and Wales in 1688, 1759, 1798, 1846, and 1867. Lindert and Williamson famously revised these tables, and this paper extends their work in three directions: First, servants are removed from middle and upper class households in the tables of King, Massie, and Colquhoun and tallied separately. Second, estimates are made for the same tables of the number and incomes of women and children employed in the various occupations, and, third, incomes are broken down into rents, profits, and employment income. These extensions to the tables allow variables to be computed that can be checked against independent estimates as a validation exercise. The tables are retabulated in a standardized set of six social groups to highlight the changing structure of society across the industrial revolution. Gini coefficients are computed from the social tables to measure inequality. These measures confirm that Britain traversed a ‘Kuznets curve’ in this period. Changes in overall inequality are related to the changing fortunes of the major social classes. Description: The version of record for this article can be found at: Allen, R. C. (2019). Class structure and inequality during the industrial revolution: Lessons from England's social tables, 1688–1867. The Economic History Review, 72, 88-125. https://doi.org/10.1111/ehr.12661 2017-05-01T00:00:00Z