MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Une « conservation architecturée » : individualisation et autonomisation des réserves de musées, 1995-2015

2018· book-chapter· fr· W2933268336 on OpenAlexaff
Roland May

Bibliographic record

VenuePresses universitaires du Septentrion eBooks · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Canadian institutionsCanadian Heritage
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les années quatre-vingt marquent un tournant important dans l’histoire des politiques et des architectures muséales en France avec la réalisation – construction et rénovation – d’importants chantiers sur l’ensemble du territoire national : le Louvre, musée des Beaux-Arts de Lyon, de Grenoble, de Lille, de Nancy, musée d’Art contemporain de Lyon, Carré d’Art de Nîmes, musée archéologique de Saint-Romain-en-Gall ou d’Arles… et dont l’impulsion se poursuit de nos jours : Paris, musée de Cluny, ...

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePresses universitaires du Septentrion eBooksSame topicCultural Heritage Management and PreservationFrench-language works237,207