Bibliographic record
Abstract
Throughout the Renaissance, people would dress sculptures of the Virgin during sacred ceremonies, adorn sculptures of the Madonna and Child with jewels, and swaddle sculptures of the infant Christ. Agostino di Giovanni’s Annunciate Virgin (1321) [Fig. 1] reflects the popular tradition of dressing sculptures in Tuscany during the Trecento and Quattrocento. Agostino di Giovanni carved the Annunciate Virgin wearing only a red underdress, as this sculpture was originally dressed in an actual fabric mantle and veil. The moveable joints in her elbows and shoulders facilitated dressing. The Virgin reflects the idealized beauty standards of the period, with full cheeks, almond-shaped eyes, a small pointed nose, and delicate rosebud lips. During the Trecento and Quattrocento, dressing sculptures were popular, and worshipers likely engaged in the act of dressing as a form of devotion. Her youthful beauty, and the fact that worshipers dressed her, raise issues of decorum, especially considering that the act of dressing implies undressing. These tensions are reflected in later accounts of priests dressing sculptures of the Virgin Mary using poles and under the supervision of pious women. Given that worshipers dressed this sculpture in actual fabric, how did the Annunciate Virgin balance humanity and divinity, thus mitigating these concerns of modesty? This research paper explores this question using the visual reconstruction of the Annunciate Virgin, which recreates the original physical and social context of the sculpture [Figs. 2 –3]. (clockwise from upper left) Figure 1.Annunciate Virgin by Agostino di Giovanni1321 Figure 2.Annunciate Virgin Reconstruction Figure 3.Reconstruction
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.005 |
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".