MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026235001 · doi:10.4000/formationemploi.3035

La construction des groupes professionnels : le cas des restaurateurs d’œuvres d’art en France et aux Etats-Unis

2010· article· fr· W2026235001 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFormation emploi · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Identity and Heritage
Canadian institutionsMinistère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité Sociale (Québec)Musée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En comparant les chemins de professionnalisation empruntés à partir des années 60 par les restaurateurs d’œuvres d’art en France et aux États-Unis, cet article étudie les acteurs et les processus intervenant dans la construction des groupes professionnels. Les institutions, comme l’État et les associations professionnelles, contribuent certes à déterminer les contours possibles des dynamiques professionnelles – établissement d’un monopole sur le marché des musées pour les diplômés des nouvelles formations spécialisées en France, absence de règlementation et développement du salariat côté américain. Cependant, les luttes interprofessionnelles et les négociations intra-organisationnelles alimentent aussi ces dynamiques, en particulier celles qui touchent à la place des restaurateurs dans la division du travail par rapport aux conservateurs de musées.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.250 · 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