Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artist Boss presents a series of illustrated interviews with Anthony Caro's (1924-2013) studio assistants and critical essays that explore the role of artists' assistants to raise questions concerning the status of production, originality, authenticity, and authorship within the tradition of twentieth-century British sculpture. From varied backgrounds, the assistants' responses illustrate the different ways in which the evolution of sculptural language has been negotiated. They provide immediate access to artists' thought processes and an insight into the complexity of changing roles. Collectively they reflect and offer a range of perspectives on the frequently contentious and widely discussed role of the artist s assistant and modes of sculptural production. Contributors include: Anthony Caro, Guy Martin, James Wolfe (US), Willard Boepple (US), Andre Fauteux (Canada), John Gibbons, Jon Isherwood (US), Shaun Cassidy (US), Ian Dawson, Beth Cullen-Kerridge, Gavin Morris, Tim Peacock, Hywel Livingstone, Jonathan Gilderleeves, William Fausset, Patrick Cunningham, Olivia Bax, Neil Ayling & John Wallbank. Forewords by Tim Marlow and Karen Wilkin Essays by Jenny Dunseath and Mark Wilsher, Dr Michael Petry, Prof K P Cross and Sam Cornish
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.015 |
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".