Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’avenir du patrimoine moderne est incertain malgré les avancées faites dans ce domaine depuis une vingtaine d’années. Restaurés avec le plus grand soin, comme si rien ne s’était passé depuis leur livraison, quand il s’agit des grandes œuvres du mouvement moderne, des édifices et des ensembles urbains ordinaires du milieu du xx e siècle sont trop souvent méprisés, sinon maltraités, même s’ils ne sont pas sans qualités. En conviant une trentaine d’auteurs, gestionnaires, praticiens et chercheurs à faire part de leurs expériences et de leurs expertises en matière de documentation, de protection, de conservation et de mise en valeur de l’architecture novatrice du xx e siècle, cet ouvrage propose un bilan sur l’état de la question au Québec, au Canada et ailleurs. Il s’inscrit dans la foulée du colloque international organisé fin 2010 par l’École de design et l’Institut du patrimoine de l’Université du Québec à Montréal.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".