MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922844329 · doi:10.4000/pds.766

Labelliser le patrimoine du XXe siècle : stratégies et méthodes à travers l’exemple des Drac Île-de-France et Occitanie (Languedoc Roussillon et Midi-Pyrénées)

2019· article· fr· W2922844329 on OpenAlex
Michèle François, Valérie Gaudard

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePatrimoines du Sud · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Identity and Heritage
Canadian institutionsCanadian Heritage
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le Label « Patrimoine du XXe siècle » créé en 1999 par le ministère de la Culture et de la Communication a pour but de faire connaître l’architecture de cette période. La comparaison des labellisations réalisées par les DRAC d’Île-de-France et d’Occitanie (ex Languedoc-Roussillon et de Midi-Pyrénées) montre la variété des méthodes employées pour rendre compte soit de l’importance numérique des édifices remarquables soit de la difficulté à établir ce corpus et de la nécessité de s’appuyer sur les inventaires ou études thématiques ou monographiques. Si l’attribution du label, désormais appelé "Architecture contemporaine remarquable" s’est faite depuis vingt ans de façon très diverse selon les régions, elle est toujours l’occasion de mettre en lumière et de porter à la connaissance du public des œuvres architecturales remarquables, notamment via une augmentation impressionnante des publications de qualité sur l'architecture du XXe siècle.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.230 · 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