MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W164282649

The Lost Art of Naval Decoration in 18th Century French Canada

2012· dissertation· en· W164282649 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ronald Portanier

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2012
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMaritime and Coastal Archaeology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSculptureVisual artsNavyDocumentationScholarshipArtEphemeral keyArt historyHistoryEngineeringArchaeologyLawComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

French Canada embarked upon a naval ship building programme between 1738 and 1759 to provide warships for induction into the French navy. Archival records mention the construction of these warships and naval dispatches report on their exploits. These warships were adorned with sculptures made by Canadian sculptors. However, the ephemeral quality of these sculptures and scarce documentation about their aesthetic appearance has resulted in an absence of scholarship on their artistic merit. The sculptures that adorned these ships were unique for every ship, with each sculpture made for the space it was meant to fill and to accommodate its viewing point. Hence, inquiring about the sculptures that adorned the warships built in French Canada requires acknowledging the type of ship they were intended for, their surrounding architectural space, and the perception they were meant to convey. This thesis reviews these three essential elements relative to the naval sculpture practiced by the Canadian sculptors of French Canada in an attempt to discover this lost art.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0230.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicMaritime and Coastal ArchaeologyFrench-language works237,207