Public et non-public du patrimoine culturel : deux enquêtes sur les manifestations différenciées de l’intérêt et du désintérêt
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RésuméL’histoire des publics de la culture « cultivée » est singulière en ce qu’elle est directement liée à une préoccupation permanente des responsables de la culture : comment attirer dans les institutions culturelles un très large public allant bien au-delà d’une élite déjà convaincue et avertie ? Cette attention portée au non public comparativement au public déjà convaincu correspond explicitement au grand projet de démocratisation de la culture qui est le leitmotiv de la plupart des politiques culturelles.Que signifie au juste être public ? Pour le cas du patrimoine culturel, comment se constitue l’opposition entre public et non public ? Deux études de cas, tirées d’enquêtes récentes conduites de part et d’autre de l’Atlantique, nous permettent d’interroger cette opposition.AbstractThe story of high art publics is particular in a sense that it is directly linked to a permanent concern of cultural authorities ; with regard to cultural institutions, how can we attract a vast public that goes well beyond the elite, a group that is already dedicated and informed ? This focus on the non-public as opposed to the already dedicated public, corresponds explicitly to the cultural democratisation project that is the leitmotiv of most cultural policies.What does being public mean ? In the case of cultural heritage, how is the opposition between public and non-public formed ? Two case studies, taken from recent surveys conducted both here and in Europe, allow us to question this opposition.RésumenLa historia de los públicos de la cultura “culta” y singular en lo que está directamente ligado a una preocupación permanente de los responsables de la cultura : ¿Cómo atraer en las instituciones culturales un mayor número de público que está más allá de la élite ya convencida y enterada ? Esta atención dirigida hacia el no público comparativamente al público ya convencido, corresponde explícitamente al gran proyecto de democratización de la cultura que es el tema central de la mayor parte de las políticas culturales¿Qué significa verdaderamente ser público ? Para el caso del patrimonio cultural, ¿cómo se constituye la oposición entre público y no público ? Dos estudios de caso, sacados de encuestas recientes realizadas a un lado y al otro del Atlántico, nos permiten de interrogar esta oposición. Additional informationNotes on contributorsDaniel JacobiDaniel Jacobi and Jason LuckerhoffPublic et non-public du patrimoine culturel : deux enquêtes sur les manifestations différenciées de l’intérêt et du désintérêtJason LuckerhoffDaniel Jacobi and Jason LuckerhoffPublic et non-public du patrimoine culturel : deux enquêtes sur les manifestations différenciées de l’intérêt et du désintérêt
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".