Bibliographic record
Abstract
Originally, initiated as ICOMOS Action Plan on 20th C. Heritage, and named Montreal Action Plan (MAP20), this plan expresses the concern of ICOMOS members and committees about the protection, conservation, management and presentation of more recent forms of cultural heritage that demonstrate intellectual, social, technological or artistic evolution. MAP20 is the production of a global survey of the theme from the worldwide network of ICOMOS National and International Scientific Committees. It took place thanks to the financial support of Quebec’s Ministere de la Culture et des Communications, the City of Montreal, ICOMOS Finland, US/ICOMOS, and private organizations. This initiative has been actual for nearly 20 years and had brought together ICOMOS to co-operate with organizations such as DOCOMOMO, ICCROM, UNESCO, TICCIH, Council of Europe, the US and Canadian National Parks Services. ICOMOS has also been cooperating closely with UNESCO’s World Heritage Center to promote the nomination of 20th century properties for the World Heritage List. Additionally, many national reports included in the Heritage at Risk 2000 Report, mentioned concern over the fate of various heritage types associated with 19th and 20th century that has been finally documented and identified in the 20th century Heritage Survey project that was undertaken with the support of the US/ICOMOS Summer Intern Program 2002.
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 | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.020 |
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.
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".