MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6899273743 · doi:10.58079/rcp

Les peintres et la première guerre mondiale : commandes, productions, collections

2014· other· fr· W6899273743 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenEdition (OpenEdition) · 2014
Typeother
Languagefr
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFirst world warBattleThe artsSpanish Civil War

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Organisé par le Centre de recherches anglophones de l’Université Paris-Ouest Nanterre La Défense (EA 370) et la Bibliothèque de documentation internationale contemporaine, avec le Musée de l’Armée, le Centre d’études et de recherches sur l’espace germanophone (EA 4223) et le Le HAR-Histoire des arts et des représentations (EA 4414), du 4 au 6 décembre 2014, ce colloque international est consacré aux représentations de la première guerre mondiale par les peintres qui l’ont vécue. En Grande-Bretagne, en France, et en Allemagne, pendant la première guerre mondiale et les années de l’immédiat après-guerre, des milliers d’œuvres d’art ont vu le jour, par lesquelles les artistes ont cherché à représenter le conflit. Le colloque sera l'occasion de s’intéresser aux œuvres réalisées et aux conditions de leur production, de leur diffusion et de leur réception. Centré sur la France, la Grande-Bretagne et l’Allemagne, il sera ouvert à la possibilité de comparaisons plus larges, avec d’autres pays engagés dans le conflit (l’Italie, la Russie, la Belgique, l’Autriche, les États-Unis, le Canada ou l’Australie, par exemple). Le contexte institutionnel de la production et de la diffusion des œuvres en constituera une voie d’approche privilégiée, mais non la seule, en lien avec d’autres thématiques.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenEdition (OpenEdition)French-language works237,207