Bibliographic record
Abstract
En matière de lits, les collections royales françaises conservaient à la Renaissance des œuvres exceptionnelles, mais, en raison de leur disparition au xviiie siècle et du caractère lacunaire des comptes et des inventaires, il est souvent difficile d’en avoir une connaissance précise. Pourtant les documents descriptifs rédigés postérieurement, lorsque les œuvres existaient encore, peuvent nous aider notablement à préciser leur apparence. De ce point de vue, l’Inventaire général du mobilier de la Couronne sous Louis XIV (1673), publié par Jules Guiffrey à la fin du xixe siècle, qui décrit un certain nombre de lits ou de dais de la Renaissance, s’avère d’une grande utilité. L’article est suivi de la publication révisée des descriptions des lits, accompagnées de l’historique de ceux-ci tel qu’il peut être reconstitué à l’aide des inventaires et des archives du Garde-Meuble.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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.
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".