MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015172086 · doi:10.4000/paysage.4736

De la mise en valeur du patrimoine viticole à l’émergence d’un paysage culturel au Chili

2017· article· fr· W3015172086 on OpenAlex
C.M.G. Thomas

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

VenueProjets de paysage · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrbanism, Landscape, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Heritage
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtGeographyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article retrace l’émergence au Chili de la catégorie de paysage culturel, au cours d’une démarche particulière d’appropriation et de mise en valeur des paysages de vignoble, associée à la revalorisation de ce patrimoine comme stratégie de promotion viticole et œnotouristique. Dans le contexte d’une législation longtemps focalisée sur les paysages naturels – dont les paysages culturels ne font pas partie –, ce processus s’est produit sans cadre normatif. Il est le fruit d’un travail en résonance entre les secteurs public, privé et universitaire visant à définir des éléments propres (voire patrimoniaux) à la viticulture chilienne, tout en s’appuyant sur des références mondiales en la matière (dont les paysages culturels viticoles classés au titre du patrimoine mondial par l’Unesco). De ce fait, si ce paysage culturel viticole est de plus en plus reconnu et pris en compte comme outil de promotion, il reste encore mal défini et caractérisé en tant que tel dans le pays, considéré davantage comme un cadre « naturel » des vignobles.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.269 · 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