MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081274284 · doi:10.4000/civilisations.3123

Digestion patrimoniale

2012· article· fr· W2081274284 on OpenAlexaff
Anne Monjaret, Mélanie Roustan

Bibliographic record

VenueCivilisations · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Identity and Heritage
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Si le Palais de la Porte Dorée, à Paris, a toujours abrité un musée, ses contenus et leur interprétation ont varié : colonies, outre-mer, arts lointains puis immigration. Ces évolutions patrimoniales n’ont pas été sans heurts, que la requalification porte sur les collections ou le bâtiment, construit en 1931 pour l’Exposition coloniale. Certaines contestations visent les destinations patrimoniales de l’édifice : grèves des personnels, pour la fermeture du Musée national des arts d’Afrique et d’Océanie (2003) ; manifestations de militants extérieurs, controverses et démissions d’intellectuels, lors de l’installation de la Cité nationale de l’Histoire de l’immigration (2007). D’autres contestations ne prennent plus ce patrimoine pour enjeu mais comme levier pour servir une cause : indépendance d’anciennes colonies ; régularisation d’immigrés « sans-papiers ». L’occupation des lieux par des « travailleurs grévistes sans-papiers » durant l’hiver 2010 est au centre de l’attention, à travers l’analyse de l’originalité d’outils de contestation relevant de la sphère patrimoniale : accompagnement de la lutte par des photographes ou illustrateurs, édition d’ouvrages, montage d’expositions par des militants, collecte en continu par le musée… Est ici interrogée la capacité quasi immédiate de « digestion » des événements présents par le paradigme patrimonial.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0630.020

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCivilisationsSame topicCultural Identity and HeritageFrench-language works237,207