La campagne de restauration de dix reliefs en stuc italiens dans le cadre du programme ESPRIT : aspects matériels d’une réhabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En quatre ans, de 2014 à 2018, le programme ESPRIT (Étude des stucs polychromés de la Renaissance italienne) a permis la restauration d’une dizaine de reliefs en stuc italiens de la Renaissance : sept du département des sculptures du musée du Louvre et trois du musée des Beaux-Arts de Strasbourg. Tous restaurés dans les ateliers du Centre de recherche et de restauration des musées de France, ils ont fait l’objet de diverses analyses et du suivi d’un comité de restauration. Ces reliefs forment un corpus homogène et représentatif des différentes problématiques propres à la restauration de ce type d’objet. En l’absence d’archives ou presque, ils ont bénéficié d’une approche méthodologique et déontologique commune impliquant notamment la mise en place systématique d’études préalables avant restauration. Au terme de ces études de cas, on peut distinguer trois niveaux d’intervention de restauration en fonction de l’état de conservation de chaque œuvre, en particulier de sa polychromie.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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".