El proyecto de conservación y restauración del Pórtico de la Gloria
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolSe presentan en este Rudesindus 2019, no 12 una serie de trabajos que sintetizan los aspectos tecnicos relacionados con la restauracion del Portico de la Gloria. Si bien en el proyecto han trabajado un nutrido grupo de profesionales abordando numerosas lineas de investigacion y estudio, exponer de forma pormenorizada todas ellas excederia los limites de esta publicacion. La iniciativa ha sido un modelo de colaboracion entre instituciones publicas y privadas, Ministerio de Cultura y Deporte, Xunta de Galicia, Fundacion Catedral de Santiago y Fundacion Barrie; esta ultima ha patrocinado los trabajos y posee una larga trayectoria en la conservacion del patrimonio cultural. EnglishA series of works that synthesize the technical aspects related to the restoration of the Portico de la Gloria are presented in this Rudesindus 2019, no 12. Although in this the project has worked a huge group of professionals addressing many lines of research and study, exposing in detail all of them would exceed the limits of this publication. The project has been a model of institutional collaboration between public and private institutions, and has been sponsored by the Foundation Barrie, with a long history in the conservation of cultural heritage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it