MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116846476 · doi:10.60001/ricla.v35.n2.4

O Contributo do Grand Tour no Desenvolvimento e Implementação de Métodos de Conservação e Restauro

2025· article· W7116846476 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Interfaces · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArchaeology and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAristocracy (class)Quarter (Canadian coin)FrescoNormative

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recepção da Antiguidade Clássica, no ciclo intelectual europeu do segundo quartel do século XVIII, propiciou o progressivo desenvolvimento e implementação de um quadro metodológico e normativo em prol da conservação e restauro dos sítios arqueológicos vesuvianos. Primeiramente Herculano (1738) e, posteriormente Pompeia (1748), exerceriam não somente fascínio e assombro aos olhos da aristocracia europeia em seu Grand Tour pelo mezzogiorno italiano, mas exigiriam da periférica e juvenil corte partenopeia, assim como dos sucessivos delegados régios, ações efetivas de salvaguarda patrimonial. O presente artigo tem por finalidade apresentar parte do acervo documental e gráfico desta fase histórica, o qual atesta o gradual processo de desenvolvimento de mecanismos legais e interventivos com os percursos e os percalços que a nascente Ciência Arqueológica teve que administrar. Como teremos oportunidade de demonstrar, tal exame revela os limites da prática metodológica, muito embora adotassem princípios que antecipariam a moderna teorização conservativa e de restauro. Palavras-chave: Arqueologia Clássica. Conservação e Restauro. LegislaçãoPatrimonial. Recepção da Antiguidade e Sítios Vesuvianos. AbstractThe reception of Classical Antiquity, in the European intellectual cycle of the second quarter of the 18th century, led to the progressive development and implementation of a methodological and normative framework for the conservation and restoration of Vesuvian archaeological sites. First Herculaneum (1738), and later Pompeii (1748), would not only fascinate and amaze the european aristocracy on their Grand Tour in the italian mezzogiorno, but would also require effective heritage protection measures from the peripheral and youthful Neapolitan Court, as well as fromsuccessive royal delegates. The purpose of this article is to present part of the documental and graphic collection from this historical phase, which attests the gradual process of developing legal and interventionist mechanisms with the paths and setbacks that the nascent Archaeological Science had to manage. As we will have the opportunity to demonstrate, such examination reveals the limits of methodological practice, even though they adopted principles that anticipated modern conservative and restoration theory. Keywords: Classical Archaeology. Conservation and Restoration. Heritage Legislation. Reception of Antiquity. and Vesuvian Sites

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.335 · 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