MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1035597419 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511777486.030

Vorticism

2010· book-chapter· en· W1035597419 on OpenAlexaff
Miranda Hickman

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPound (networking)PaintingSculptureArtArt historyVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Writing from Rapallo in 1924, Ezra Pound waxed nostalgic to his comrade the painter and writer Wyndham Lewis, reminiscing about a moment a decade earlier when he and Lewis had converged in London's avant-guerre artistic milieu. In 1914, Pound and Lewis had both been members of the newly emergent avant-garde movement of vorticism, known chiefly for its paintings – which featured a bold, angular, dynamic version of the geometric abstract idiom prevalent in the visual arts of the early twentieth century – but also involving sculpture, literature, and photography. Lewis had spearheaded the movement; Pound had joined it in mid 1914. In his retrospective letter, Pound recalled Blast , the short-lived periodical (1914–15) that had served as vorticism's official organ and housed its manifestoes. A foot in height, with a bright puce cover stamped with aggressive black sans-serif lettering, Blast sported an outlandish visual code that signaled avant-garde defiance and mischief – and, as Paige Reynolds notes, that resonated with the visual signatures of advertising of the climate. Lewis would later fondly remember Blast as “that hugest and pinkest of magazines.” The magazine's contents – including hyperbolic manifestoes “blasting” Victorianism in gigantic type; geometric paintings; a phantasmagoric avant-garde play by Wyndham Lewis entitled Enemy of the Stars , ventured as an example of literary vorticism – sustained the audacity signaled by the magazine's bibliographic code.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.010

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.145 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicHistorical Art and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207