L’étude de l’histoire de l’art au Québec et au Canada, du xviie au xixe siècle, à l’aune des échanges culturels et des interrelations sociales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans le contexte d’un entretien mené par Sophie Duhem et articulé autour des questions de circulations, de réseaux sociaux, de transferts culturels et d’« identités artistiques », cet article effectue un retour sur les cadres méthodologiques et théoriques utilisés par l’historien de l’art Pierre-Olivier Ouellet lors de ses recherches menées sur les arts québécois et canadien. Celui-ci prend notamment appui sur sa thèse de doctorat, Circulation, usages et fonctions des œuvres d’art par les civils et les militaires en Nouvelle-France (1608-1759), ses divers articles, de même que sur ses recherches actuelles sur l’artiste canadien-français François Baillairgé (1759-1830) afin de mieux définir son cheminement et développer des réflexions autour de sa pratique et de son champ d’étude.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".