La politique de la ville d'Ottawa envers l'art local vue à travers les actions de son <i>Programme d'Art Public</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research paper has been made during an exchange year in Canada, in the City of Ottawa. It is taking his sources into an internship into the Public Art Program of the City. The goal of this paper is to weight the City of Ottawa's attitude toward the local artists, through the mandates of the Public Art Program. Since its foundation as an independent nation, Canada has been seeking a community reassembling culture. After a post colonialist period when the national art was very conformist landscapes, Canada went toward multiculturalism and the open-minded position on contemporary art we nowadays know. The Public Art Program of Ottawa's mandate is to promote and increase the city's artistic patrimony. In this perspective, he uses a public art collection in constant circulation, a direct purchase program to increase it and two professional galleries where the local artists can exhibit their work. He is also managing large public art commissions. In spite of all his activities, the Public Art Program is not always granted with the proper finances.
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 | 0.034 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 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".