Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans le texte qui suit, l’auteure expose, à travers le prisme du critère du lieu dans lequel se trouve l’objet culturel, la variabilité de son régime juridique et, le cas échéant, elle en souligne les carences et les faiblesses. En effet, aborder l’objet culturel par le lieu permet de mettre en exergue une gradation de la protection que le droit québécois peut offrir. Surtout, il devient possible d’établir la manière dont la technique d’affectation constitue un moyen grâce auquel le niveau de protection de l’objet culturel est augmenté, et par là un moyen pour le sortir des aléas juridiques qui découlent du lieu dans lequel il se trouve. Ce faisant, trois types de lieux sont ainsi explorés – le musée comme lieu protecteur par excellence, le site archéologique comme non-lieu normatif et le mur support de graffiti comme lieu de conflit normatif – au gré de différentes modalités d’affectation telles que les charges grevant la libéralité, le classement des biens ou encore l’obligation propter rem.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".