Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les ouvrages sur le patrimoine se sont décuplés au cours des dernières décennies. Issus de différentes disciplines, les chercheurs ont multiplié les angles d’analyse pour explorer, comprendre et cerner les nombreuses déclinaisons du patrimoine, qu’il soit matériel, immatériel ou naturel, pour reprendre la désormais canonique tripartition. Plus que l’objet lui-même, à travers la connaissance de ses formes, de ses qualités ou de l’intérêt pour sa sauvegarde, ce sont les processus inhérents à sa constitution qui retiennent aujourd’hui l’attention (Amougou, 2004). En effet, intéressés par ce qu’il est maintenant convenu de nommer les phénomènes de la patrimonialisation, les chercheurs pistent, déconstruisent ou comparent les mécanismes qui participent à la fabrication du patrimoine (Davallon, 2006 ; Morisset, 2009 ; Heinich, 2009). L’approche permet ainsi de mieux appréhender la place occupée par le patrimoine dans nos sociétés contemporaines. Si les études sur la patrimonialisation ont occasionné un changement important de paradigme dans l’approche…
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 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".