Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article considers the possible influences of the physiognomic studies on the Romantic portrait, using as paradigms Géricault’s Portraits de Monomanes . Painted during the period of the very beginning of French psychiatry, at a time when this new discipline began to recognize the presence of the subject in the madman, these works question the dialogue engaged between art and psychiatry, between insanity and reason, between the visibility and invisibility of madness on human features. In considering this crossed gaze on the insane thus engendered, this article delves specifically into two facets of this duality. First, it examines the development of medico-legal psychiatry, in favour of which the alienist Jean-Étienne Georget—presumed owner of the Monomanes —had actively worked in an effort to impose his discipline as the only one able to recognize the invisible marks of mental illness. Second, it considers a series of works commissioned by the alienist Jean-Étienne-Dominique Esquirol from two artists: Georges-François-Marie Gabriel and Ambroise Tardieu. It is argued that these works, as for Géricault’s Monomanes , individualize the insane in the early nineteenth century and acquire a characteristic specific to the genre of portraiture: recognition and commemoration of a subject.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".