New Insights into the Cleaning of Paintings: Proceedings from the Cleaning 2010 International Conference, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia and Museum Conservation Institute
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present volume brings together the papers and posters presented at the âCleaning 2010 InternationalâNew Insights into the Cleaning of Paintingsâ conference that was held at the Universidad Politécnica de Valencia in Spain, in collaboration with the Smithsonianâs Museum Conservation Institute. This was the first major international conference on this topic in two decades. The 20 papers and 19 extended abstracts presented at the conference are included in this publication, grouped into four main categories: Ethics, Aesthetics, Training, and Documentation; Traditional Media: Egg Tempera and Oil; Modern Paints; and Cleaning systems. Within each category, the papers and extended abstracts are grouped by the specific topic they address tomake it easier for the reader to find all related material in one section. A summary of panel discussions held at the end of the conference has also been included. All papers and abstracts included in this publication have been peer reviewed. The aim of the conference was to provide a knowledge exchange forum and to produce a publication that assembles the latest developments in the various studies addressing the problems that affect paintings. These range from normal soiling to removal of aged varnishes, from the effect of solvents on paints to the subsequent changes in their mechanical behavior. The cleaning of unvarnished paintings is one of the most critical issues that was discussed. Finally, different cleaning techniques, such as gels, soaps, enzymes, ionic liquids, and foams, as well as various dry methods and lasers, are discussed in various papers and extended abstracts. Although the conference was organized in Spain, the United States contributed 21% of the contents, followed by Spain and Italy, both with 16%; the United Kingdom and Germany, each with 9%; and Canada, the Netherlands, and Portugal, all with 5%. The rest are individual contributions from Australia, Norway, Switzerland, Poland, and Greece.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it