MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606440370

Between Art and Artifact: the Photography of Abel Boulineau

2011· dissertation· en· W2606440370 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vanessa Fleet

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhotography and Visual Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotographyContextualizationVisual artsArtifact (error)AttributionArtMeaning (existential)HistoryEpistemologyComputer scienceLinguisticsPhilosophyPsychologyInterpretation (philosophy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis explores the function, classification, and re-contextualization of historical photographs as they are understood and digested by art museums. The Abel Boulineau French Regional Life collection at the Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO), which I researched, re-organized, and re-attributed during the summer of 2010, provides a case study for this topic. I investigate the contingencies of meaning surrounding late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century photography, and the inadequacy of art historical models for interpreting works not originally created as aesthetic objects. I explore how museums must understand and grapple with its early photography, and the implications of re-contextualizing such collections within its institutional discourses. The work of producing an attribution places necessary emphasis on photographs as historical entities, and recovers information about their original creation and circulation. Surveying the French Regional Life collection reveals both the pragmatic and theoretical issues involved in making an analysis of early photography. iii Acknowledgments

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicPhotography and Visual CultureFrench-language works237,207