Love Your Neighbour: Evaluating the Creative Impulse of Armand Lemiez
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes an alternative perspective for evaluating the work of a community artist, Armand Lemiez. Evaluative categories often reflect the ethnocentric criteria of collectors representing both private and public interests, not the community in which the work was made. Classification is a cultural expression of the receiver's response to an object's aesthetic, it is not an inherent component of any object. Value, therefore, is an expression of a social aesthetic. Public and private representatives have evaluated the work of Armand Lemiez based on elite criteria derived from public expectations, governmental policy, and personal background. Community members, the folk, have their own criteria that are distinct, but no less relevant than those of elite interests. This paper is intended as an overview and introduction to the work of Armand Lemiez. The terms elite and folk are used in their most general sense in order to facilitate discussion. Resume Cet article propose une perspective differente a l'evaluation de l'œuvre d'un artiste communautaire, Armand Lemiez. Les categories d'evaluation refletent souvent les criteres ethnocentriques des collectionneurs qui representent a la fois des interets publics et prives mais pas ceux de la collectivite dont l'œuvre est issue. La classification est une expression culturelle de la reponse d'une personne a l'esthetique d'une œuvre, elle n'est pas une composante inherente d'un objet. Des representants des secteurs publics et prives ont evalue l'œuvre d'Armand Lemiez en se basant sur des criteres d'elite derivant des attentes du secteur public, des politiques gouvernementales et de leur evolution personnelle. Les membres de la collectivite ont leurs propres criteres distincts, mais tout aussi pertinents que ceux de l'elite. Dans cet article qui se veut un apercu et une introduction a l'œuvre d'Armand Lemiez, l'auteur emploie les termes elite (elite) et folk (gens de la collectivite) dans leur sens le plus general afin de faciliter la discussion.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".