MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890455570 · doi:10.7202/1051059ar

Un patrimoine encore interdit ?

2018· article· fr· W2890455570 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alexandre Herlea

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnologies · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Identity and Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le Mémorial des victimes du communisme et de la résistance de Sighet occupe une place de grande importance dans le contexte de la sortie du communisme et de la construction d’un monde basé sur les valeurs universelles correctement hiérarchisées. Il s’agit du premier mémorial des victimes du communisme au monde, fondé en 1993 et nommé en 1998 par le Conseil de l’Europe parmi les trois premiers lieux de la mémoire européenne, à côté du Mémorial d’Auschwitz et du Mémorial de la Paix de Caen. La mémoire du communisme en Roumanie est-elle aujourd’hui encore un « patrimoine interdit » ? Pour tenter de répondre à cette difficile question, il convient d’abord de développer quelques considérations sur la Roumanie après la chute du communisme, ses rapports avec son passé et la manière dont celui-ci est géré tant au niveau du pouvoir – des autorités et des institutions – que de l’opinion publique, c’est-à-dire des mentalités, en prenant en compte le contexte plus général en Europe et dans le monde. L’analyse portera ensuite sur le Mémorial Sighet, formé d’un Musée et d’un Centre international d’études sur le communisme, son histoire, ses réalisations et sa place dans le combat pour la connaissance et la diffusion de la vérité historique.

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)0.005
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.016
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.229 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthnologiesSame topicCultural Identity and HeritageFrench-language works237,207