MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2728054077

La restitution du patrimoine matériel et immatériel : Regards croisés Canada / Mélanésie

2008· book· fr· W2728054077 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Florence Dupré, Laugrand Frédéric, Pierre Maranda

Bibliographic record

VenueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal) · 2008
Typebook
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRestitutionPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce numéro des Cahiers du CIÉRA aborde une question complexe et contemporaine qui touche à la fois au domaine des sciences sociales, de l’histoire de l’art, du politique et du juridique : la restitution du patrimoine culturel des populations autochtones.\nLes contributions présentées font suite à un atelier de recherche qui a eu lieu\nen septembre 2007 à l’initiative de Pierre Maranda et Frédéric Laugrand, tous deux\nchercheurs au Centre interuniversitaire d’études et de recherches autochtones\n(CIÉRA) de la Faculté des sciences sociales de l’Université Laval. Intitulé La\nrestitution du patrimoine matériel et immatériel. Regards croisés Canada /\nMélanésie, cet atelier a permis à des acteurs de différents horizons – autochtones et non-autochtones, universitaires et muséologues, historiens d’art, juristes et\nanthropologues, mélanésianistes et américanistes – d’échanger leurs points de vue et leurs expériences sur le sujet. Le numéro ne prétend évidemment pas couvrir l’ensemble de la thématique, ni apporter des solutions pratiques. Il soulève plutôt de nouvelles questions exigeant de poursuivre la réflexion sous un angle comparatif,\ninterdisciplinaire et en partenariat avec les communautés concernées.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0180.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal)Same topicCultural Heritage Management and PreservationFrench-language works237,207