Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a museum ofthe environment composed of reconstituted ecosystems, Montreal 's Biodome strives to focus on the awakening of a global environmental consciousness. This is a site for making the environment a cultural heritage - where that complex thing called 'the environment' is interpreted as a legacy. Inspired by the sociology of innovation, the research conducted here aims to analyse the way in which the environment, considered in its many dimensions (scientific, political and symbolic) is established as a heritage at the Biodome. The analysis of those controversies that galvanized the Project 's beginnings allows us, first of all, to update general ideas about heritage held by various active agents - ideas that include the definition of guarantor (those who are in charge), of content (a legacy that is part of the public domain) and of the link between these two terms (cultural heritage management policy). Secondly, the idea ofwhat constitutes the environment itself is updated, through an analysis of those registers of justification (ecological, civil and 'oikological') put into work by those acting agents. Finally, the confrontation between those propositions that are under the purview of museography and the actual uses of the museum allow us to evaluate the scope of the socio-technical network that makes up the museum, as well as the impact it might acquire in the public arena. After analysis, it seems that the introduction of the environment into the museum - a process that cornes to pass by thinking hard about the very notion of heritage — also leads us to reconsider the museum 's social status as an institution for héritage building.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".