Bibliographic record
Abstract
Incontrai Lucio Saffaro la prima volta nel 1978, dopo aver ricevuto una lettera dall’amico Donald Coxeter, il famoso matematico di Toronto che suggerì a M.C. Escher di realizzare la serie di incisioni Circle Limits sulla geometria non euclidea. Coxeter mi scrisse di aver ricevuto una lettera da una persona di nome Lucio Saffaro, che gli aveva mandato uno dei suoi scritti pubbli- cati in un’enciclopedia italiana, e mi consigliò di scrivergli. Io stavo lavorando al mio primo film Platonic Solids e a M.C. Escher con lo stesso Coxeter e Sir Roger Penrose. Usando ciò che ricor- do, racconterò qui di come incontrai e divenni amico di Lucio, di quale matematica e immagini facemmo uso per realizzare insieme mostre, film, congressi e libri. Dopo aver pubblicato tanti saggi sulla sua opera di artista e di matematico, desidero ora scrivere un ricordo più personale di Lucio, secondo un approccio sempre comunque visuale. Nel farlo, affronterò anche l’importan- za dei modelli matematici per l’arte moderna e contemporanea.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.021 |
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".