MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770078613 · doi:10.4000/alsace.2583

Les sacristies, victimes collatérales de la Réforme ?

2017· article· fr· W2770078613 on OpenAlexaff
Benoît Jordan

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d’Alsace · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDeath, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La décennie 1525-1535 est marquée par l’abandon des rites catholiques traditionnels et par l’adoption d’une forme cultuelle nouvelle, marquée par la simplicité. Quelles destinées ont connu les objets présents dans les sacristies alsaciennes au moment de la Réforme ? On soupçonne volontiers les crises iconoclastes d’avoir vidé les placards et les autels. Cependant, à la lecture des inventaires, on perçoit tout d’abord une importance certaine du nombre des objets et des ornements au moment de l’irruption de la Réforme, mais un long processus de désagrégation de ces collections, selon l’histoire particulière de chaque institution prise en compte. (Benoît Jordan).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.042
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.386
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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d’AlsaceSame topicDeath, Funerary Practices, and MourningFrench-language works237,207