Research Document No. 07 Towards a Computational Archival Science? Are computational methods simply expanding Archival Science, or are they helping shape a new international research agenda?

 

PDS & Ged/A | Research Notes

Research Document No. 07

Towards a Computational Archival Science?

Are computational methods simply expanding Archival Science, or are they helping shape a new international research agenda?

10 April 2026

---

🌎 Open Science

The PDS & Ged/A Research Notes are part of an ongoing Open Science initiative dedicated to sharing research questions, emerging ideas, preliminary findings and evolving research agendas in Digital Archival Science. Our commitment is not only to communicate research outcomes, but also to document how research itself develops—its questions, debates, revisions and hypotheses—while inviting the international archival community to participate in that process.

---

When research questions begin to change

Over the past several months our research programme has followed a remarkably coherent path.

We explored Systemic Digital Preservation.

We proposed the concept of Digital Archival Ecosystems.

We revisited the OAIS Reference Model from an archival perspective.

We reinterpreted the Chain of Archival Digital Custody.

Finally, we reflected upon the epistemological identity of our research programme and its position at the intersection of the European archival tradition, the iSchools movement and Computational Archival Science (CAS).

Looking back, we realised something unexpected.

Perhaps we were no longer simply answering existing questions.

Perhaps we had begun asking entirely new ones.

Those questions pointed toward a possibility that had never been explicitly discussed within our seminar.

Could we be witnessing the emergence of a new research agenda within Archival Science itself?

We certainly do not know the answer.

But we believe the question deserves careful investigation.

---

📓 Laboratory Notes

April 2026

During one seminar session a deceptively simple question emerged.

"Is there a meaningful difference between using computational methods in archival research and developing a Computational Archival Science?"

The room became unexpectedly quiet.

Not because the question was difficult.

But because none of us had previously framed the issue in those terms.

Instead of attempting an immediate answer, we decided to preserve the question itself.

Sometimes research advances not through conclusions, but through better questions.

---

Computational Archival Science opened a new horizon

During the past decade Computational Archival Science has become an increasingly important interdisciplinary research area.

It has brought together Archival Science.

Computer Science.

Artificial Intelligence.

Data Science.

Machine Learning.

Knowledge Representation.

Network Analysis.

Semantic Technologies.

This convergence has significantly expanded the methodological possibilities available to archival researchers.

Yet our discussions began suggesting something else.

Perhaps the most important contribution of Computational Archival Science is not simply methodological.

Perhaps it lies in its ability to generate entirely new archival questions.

If so, that changes the nature of archival research itself.

---

💡 One of our research findings

Looking back at our own publications, we realised that computational methods had never been the primary focus of our investigations.

They were introduced to address questions that were already fundamentally archival.

Today we are beginning to observe a subtle but important transformation.

Computational methods are now revealing archival problems that previously remained invisible.

That shift may represent one of the most significant developments in our current research programme.

---

When methods begin generating new questions

For many years technologies helped answer questions we already knew how to formulate.

How can digital records remain authentic?

How should provenance be represented?

How can documentary continuity be preserved?

How should context be maintained?

Today new questions are emerging.

How do Artificial Intelligence models interpret archival context?

How can intelligent agents preserve provenance relationships?

Can vector embeddings represent archival organicity?

How should Digital Archival Ecosystems be analysed computationally?

How might algorithms strengthen—or weaken—trust in archival evidence?

These questions did not emerge because Archival Science changed.

They emerged because new computational methods made previously invisible archival phenomena observable.

---

🔬 An unexpected outcome of our seminar

As we revisited the concepts developed throughout our research programme, an intriguing pattern gradually became visible.

The Chain of Archival Digital Custody began to interact naturally with network analysis and graph structures.

Digital Archival Ecosystems increasingly resembled complex adaptive systems.

Systemic Digital Preservation entered into dialogue with distributed architectures and algorithmic governance.

Information retrieval became closely connected with semantic representations, vector embeddings and large language models.

Perhaps we are witnessing something more profound than interdisciplinarity.

Perhaps we are observing the emergence of a new way of investigating archival phenomena.

---

A hypothesis we had to revise

At the beginning of our seminar we assumed that Artificial Intelligence would eventually answer many archival questions.

Our discussions gradually challenged that assumption.

Artificial Intelligence certainly answered some questions.

More importantly, however, it generated many entirely new ones.

The more sophisticated computational methods became, the more indispensable archival theory appeared.

Authenticity.

Provenance.

Context.

Evidence.

Institutional continuity.

Rather than replacing archival foundations, computational innovation seemed to reinforce their importance.

Our original hypothesis therefore required substantial revision.

---

🤔 An ongoing discussion

Another question continues to accompany our research.

Should Computational Archival Science eventually become recognised as a distinct research field?

Or should it remain an interdisciplinary research agenda within Archival Science?

At this stage we simply do not know.

Perhaps the question itself is currently more valuable than any premature answer.

The discussion remains open.

---

Perhaps we are witnessing the emergence of a new research agenda

It would certainly be premature to claim that a fully developed Computational Archival Science already exists as an autonomous disciplinary field.

Nevertheless, several indicators deserve attention.

A relatively stable body of research questions.

Shared methodological approaches.

Recurring research problems.

International collaborations.

Growing interdisciplinary dialogue.

An expanding community of researchers.

Perhaps what we are observing is not the birth of a new discipline.

But the maturation of a new international research agenda within Archival Science.

If that interpretation proves correct, it will not represent a departure from archival theory.

It will represent one of its most significant contemporary developments.

---

🌱 A hypothesis under construction

When this seminar began, we believed we were investigating how digital technologies influence archives.

Today we are beginning to suspect something rather different.

Perhaps we are investigating how the theoretical foundations of Archival Science critically shape the development of computational technologies themselves.

That hypothesis will continue guiding our research programme over the coming years.

---

🧭 Research Agenda

At the conclusion of our seminar we agreed to preserve several questions that will guide the next stage of our investigations.

• How can Artificial Intelligence represent archival context without compromising authenticity?

• Can vector embeddings preserve the organic relationships that define archival records?

• How should intelligent agents operate within the Chain of Archival Digital Custody?

• What distinguishes Digital Archival Ecosystems from other forms of complex information environments?

• Are we simply incorporating computational methods into Archival Science, or are we witnessing the emergence of a Computational Archival Science research agenda?

These questions do not conclude our research.

They mark the beginning of its next phase.

---

We continue learning

Perhaps the greatest contribution of this Research Note lies not in the answers it offers.

But in demonstrating how new research agendas actually emerge.

Not through institutional declarations.

Nor through disciplinary reforms.

But when researchers begin asking questions that previously did not exist.

Perhaps that is precisely the moment we are experiencing today.

We do not yet know where these questions will lead.

For that very reason, we believe it is important to document their emergence while they are still unfolding.

---

💬 Let's continue the conversation

Within your own academic or professional experience,

are computational methods simply extending the methodological toolkit of Archival Science, or do you also perceive the emergence of a broader international research agenda?

Which research questions do you believe should define the next decade of Computational Archival Science?

We would genuinely welcome your perspective.

Your experience may become part of the next stage of this collective research journey.

---

📅 Next Research Note

Intelligent Archives?

How Artificial Intelligence, Large Language Models and intelligent agents are beginning to transform the creation, management, preservation and access of digital archival records.

25 April 2026

The research continues.

And we hope you will continue this journey with us.