MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288967945

Marco Mantova Benavides, Tiziano e un ritratto a Konopiste

2015· article· it· W2288967945 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Enrico Maria Dal Pozzolo

Bibliographic record

VenueParagone. Parte arte · 2015
Typearticle
Languageit
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRenaissance and Early Modern Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPortraitArtPaintingStyle (visual arts)Art historyHumanitiesQuarter (Canadian coin)Visual artsHistoryArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article presents the only painted portrait we know of the jurist Marco Mantova Benavides, who together with Pietro Bembo played a leading role in the world of collecting in sixteenth-century Padua. The painting in the Bohemian castle of Konopist, forming part of a series of portraits of the Obizzi family, whose residence near Battaglia Terme, not far from Padua, housed part of Benavides' collections; its style points to the authorship of the principal local portraitist of the last quarter of the 1500s, Francesco Apollodoro, called il Porcia. The artist lived in the area that included the palazzo of the jurist, with whom he is recorded to have been in contact in 1573. The prize item in Benavides' quadreria was Titian's portrait of him, which was placed in the entrance of his private museo. It has been supposed that the picture could be identified as Titian's portrait in the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, but the present rediscovery proves that the sitters cannot be the same. It is suggested here that the canvas in Konopiste, which depicts the jurist aged between 55 and 60 (i.e., in the period 1545-1550), might thus depend on the lost prototype.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.158 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueParagone. Parte arteSame topicRenaissance and Early Modern StudiesFrench-language works237,207