Memorie sismiche e processualità storiche: un quadro di conoscenze per la salvaguardia dell'identità materiale di torri e campanili
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seismic memories and historical processes of vertical architectures at risk: a framework of knowledge to safeguard the tangible identity of towers and bell towers. Vertical architectures, in the area of study catalogues as 3 and 3S by the current regional seismic classification of Piedmont, are investigated as tangible memories which express states of art and constructive schedule responding, over time, in different ways to the action of the seism. The understanding of their stratification is a significant moment of knowledge for the conservation and defense against risk. After an excursus on the protocols of address which form the state of the art of reference for research, the seismic memory of the places and constructions is expanded with reports that record the effect of earthquakes on the area (the most traumatic and broadly documented of which took place in the Pinerolo district in 1808). It is also used the historical iconographic source on the towers resulting from surveying campaigns in that first phase of examination of the heritage for cognitive and protective purposes between the last quarter of the 19th and the first half of the 20th centuries: sketches, drawings, photographs and descriptive notes by Alfredo d'Andrade, Riccardo Brayda and others, which document situations which are now sometimes latent or overwritten, highlighting important elements for preventive risk assessment.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".