Gli architetti ticinesi tra Roma e l’Europa. Alcune note in forma di quesito: il “caso” Borromini e le strategie della famiglia Fontana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The history of European architecture of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries owes much to a plethora of Lombard-Ticino builders involved in the modernization and expansion of numerous cities. The analysis of the phenomenon across the Italian peninsula reveals a notable presence of Ticino workers at least from the last quarter of the 16th century, coinciding with the arrival of the Fontana family in Rome and the papacy of Sixtus V Peretti (1585-1590), the promotor of an extensive urban renewal. \nFrom that period on, the copious archival documentation testifies how the prominent Roman (and not only Roman) construction sites were progressively colonized by an army of master builders, stucco-masters, stonecutters, carvers and masons, all originating from an area around the three prealpine lakes ʻLarioʼ (of Como), ʻCeresioʼ (of Lugano) and ʻVerbanoʼ (Maggiore). This fact has recently inspired scholars to define these artists and artisans as “Masters of the Lakes - artisti lacuali” or coming from the “Prealpine Lake District”, thus overcoming a political identity that is not suitable for describing a region that is geographically and culturally more permeable than the current administrative subdivision between Italy and Switzerland seems to suggest.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".