Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the nineteenth century, French artists and critics identified Rembrandt as an important precursor for their own goals, and he was crafted as a mentor particularly for printmakers. Books and articles on Rembrandt proliferated and numerous scenes depicting fictional narratives brought the events of his daily life before a broad public. Three such works are considered here and demonstrate how Rembrandt was made into a more accessible old master artist. By depicting Rembrandt's family, patrons, and pet monkey, and in recreating the setting of his studio filled with the objects he valued, these scenes brought Rembrandt's experiences and art into the grasp of everyday life. Indeed reaching out for Rembrandt and approximating his artistic achievements was exactly what many French artists, particularly printmakers, wanted to accomplish. In their hope of reigniting interest in prints, particularly etchings, French artists and critics turned to Rembrandt as their standard. Printmakers—both those who produced original and reproductive prints such as Jacque, Haden, Lepic, Guérard, and Courtry—sought to evoke Rembrandt's presence in their work and in their lives. They made expeditions to study his prints in public collections and bought them for their own private collections. Some made pilgrimages to Amsterdam and others produced meticulous copies or emulated the compositions of his prints. Through these acts of homage, French artists felt they both absorbed some of the ‘genius’ of the Old Master and brought his achievements closer within their grasp.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".