Zagreb Cathedral - Reconstruction through History with an Emphasis on the Period between the Two Earthquakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zagrebačku biskupiju osnovao je Ladislav 1094. godine i iako je umro samo godinu dana prije nego što se započela graditi se crkva naziva njegovim imenom. Međutim, crkvu su kroz povijest pratila mnoga razaranja kao na primjer u 13. stoljaću dolaskom Tatara. Nešto kasnije, točnije u 15. stoljeću katedrala dobiva fortifikaciju- bedeme i cilindrične renesansne kule od kojih se jedna naziva Bakačeva kula, a srušena je početkom 20. stoljeća. Ono što će biti ključno u obilježavanju katedrale je potres 1880. godine koji je uništio ne samo katedralu, već i dijelove grada. Nakon potresa se katedrala obnavlja, a obnovu je vodio glavni arhitekt H. Bollé. On je prema nekima kriv, dok je prema drugima zaslužan za katedralu koju danas vidimo. Viktor Kovačić osniva Klub hrvatskih arhitekata koji su do 1914. godine raspisali natječaj za regulaciju Kaptola i okolice, a zalagali su se i za rušenje Bakačeve kule. Nakon toga je Vjekoslav Bastl napravio urbanistički pothvat po pitanju Tržnice Dolac i preduređuje ju i gradi suvremenim materijalom (armirani beton) sve do 1930. godine kad tržnica biva otvorena za javnost. Katedralu pogađa potres 2020. godine koji stvara probleme na pročelju, svodu, statici, ali i sjevernom zvoniku koji na koncu biva uklonjen radi sigurnosti. Potres je otvorio nova pitanja i suradnju stručnjaka, ali je i otkrio do sada nepronađene renesansne fragmente nadgrobne ploče biskupa Baratina.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".