The Significance of the Logo of NEOM in Plasticizing Contemporary Abstract Artworks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study aimed at plasticizing contemporary artworks by activating the formal and denotative significances of the logo of NEOM through the concept of abstract art. To achieve the study objectives, participants were asked to plasticize contemporary artworks using multiple-sized canvas, several coloring materials, a computer and some software as a technological medium, and high-quality printer papers to activate the significances of the logo of NEOM. Abstract artworks were displayed and analyzed in the light of activating the formal and denotative significances of the logo of NEOM. The author follows the descriptive approach and the quasi-experimental approach. The experiment was applied to female students in the Arts Lab at Umm Al-Qura University in 2018/ 1439H. The experiment yielded the ability of activating the logo of NEOM in artworks (plastic works), combining the significances of the logo of NEOM and abstract art produces unusual artworks, plastically activating the logo of NEOM resulted in enriching the aesthetic value of artworks, and formal and denotative significances of the logo of NEOM enrich plastic arts especially abstract works. The author recommends keeping up with contemporary progress and events and inspiring plastic artworks from the reality around the artist.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".