MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131120213 · doi:10.7202/007875ar

Lieux de pouvoir et micropolitique de la mémoire. L’exemple de la cathédrale du Christ-Sauveur à Moscou

2004· article· fr· W2131120213 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tristan Landry

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitique et Sociétés · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bien qu’il s’intéresse à un lieu de mémoire russe, l’auteur veut éviter une promenade touristique dans le jardin des souvenirs de la Russie. Nommer un lieu de mémoire et en donner un instantané littéraire n’apporte rien de nouveau à notre compréhension de la mémoire, comme le montre la publication récente des Deutsche Erinnerungsorte par Étienne François et Hagen Schulze. Une façon d’éviter cette sorte de revue est de focaliser sur la question de la réception des lieux de mémoire, qui soulève celle du point de vue : on comprend toujours un lieu à partir d’un certain milieu. Cet article explore donc l’histoire mais aussi les cadres sociaux du souvenir d’un lieu de mémoire russe : la cathédrale du Christ-Sauveur à Moscou construite par les tsars pour commémorer la victoire des Russes sur Napoléon, détruite par Staline pour bâtir un Palais des Soviets et reconstruite sous Eltsine dans le contexte de la recherche d’une idée nationale. Cette cathédrale est un monument où se superposent des sédiments de temps successifs pour former l’histoire de la mémoire dans la Fédération de Russie.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.020
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitique et SociétésSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207