MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924841584 · doi:10.32370/ia_2019_01_17

Sculptural Image of Philosophers in Art: Grigory Skovoroda

2019· article· en· W2924841584 on OpenAlex
Alexander Pismichenko, Tatiana Shtykalo

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIntellectual Archive · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicScientific Research and Philosophical Inquiry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlastic artsContext (archaeology)Subject (documents)SculptureIdeologyAestheticsExpression (computer science)Interpretation (philosophy)EpistemologyArtVisual artsHistoryPhilosophyComputer scienceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article defines that, in modern times, fundamental ideas about monumental and decorative sculpture are beginning to undergo a rethinking, which also affected the foundations of the student learning process. It is revealed that the complex path of development that plastic has done over the course of a century needs a comprehensive philosophical and aesthetic understanding. Of particular relevance is the task of identifying the ideological sources of these changes, designating their stages, and determining the direction of evolution. The aim of the study is to reveal the transformation of the plastic image in the context of the history of culture and its development trends. Identification of features of the sculptural image of philosophers and the rationale for the search for the plastic image of G. Skovoroda.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.245 · 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