MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Развитие профессии реставратора

2023· article· ru· W7154024028 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ф.Ю. Бобров

Bibliographic record

VenueНаучные труды Санкт-Петербургской академии художеств. · 2023
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicConservation Techniques and Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRace (biology)Natural (archaeology)Interpretation (philosophy)Sociology of scientific knowledge

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Публикация предлагает русский перевод главы «Future» (Будущее) из книги одного из основателей реставрационной науки в Канаде Филиппа Варда «The Nature of Conservation: Race against Time» (Природа Консервации: Гонка со Временем», 1986), которая посвящена проблеме прогнозирования будущего профессии реставратора. Вард был одним из тех, кто на 50 лет вперед предвидел изменения в профессии. Комментарии к переводу обращают внимание не только на изменения, которые научно-технический прогресс неизбежно вносит в профессию, но и на то, как меняется само отношение к роли культурного наследия, искусству и его материалам. The publication presents a Russian translation of the chapter “Future” from the book by one of the founders of restoration science in Canada, Philip Ward, “The Nature of Conservation: Race against Time” (1986), which is devoted to the problem of predicting the future of the profession of restorer. Ward was one of those who foresaw future changes in the profession 50 years ago. Comments on the translation draw attention to the transformations that technical and scientific progress inevitably bring not only to the profession, but also change the attitude to the role of cultural heritage, art and its materials.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.008

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueНаучные труды Санкт-Петербургской академии художеств.Same topicConservation Techniques and StudiesFrench-language works237,207