
Many applications in Digital Humanities (DH) rely on annotations of the raw material. These annotations (inferred automatically or done manually) assume that labelled facts are either true or false, thus all inferences started on such annotations us boolean logic. This contradicts hermeneutic principles used by humanites in which most part of the knowledge has a degree of truth which varies depending on the experience and the world knowledge of the interpreter. In this paper we will show how uncertainty and vagueness, two main features of any historical text can be encoded in annotations and thus be considered by DH applications.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
