Quand le participatif rejoint l’Inventaire, liens entre deux approches du patrimoine dans le Gard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le Pôle d’Équilibre Territorial Rural (PETR) Garrigues et Costières de Nîmes s’est engagé en 2019 dans un inventaire de son patrimoine dans le cadre d’un partenariat avec l’Inventaire général de la Région Occitanie. Au-delà des études et de la valorisation inhérentes aux missions des chercheurs de l’inventaire, un recensement participatif avec les acteurs locaux a été souhaité par le PETR dans une perspective d’animation territoriale autour du patrimoine. Il a été créé un poste de chargé d’inventaire du patrimoine pour mener à bien ces trois missions. Cet article vient participer aux réflexions méthodologiques engendrées par la mise en place de l’opération en tentant de les contextualiser. Les apports et axes d’amélioration de l’approche seront mentionnés pour interroger les liens existants entre recensement participatif et Inventaire général du patrimoine.
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 | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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".