Confusion in the Genesis of Art and Disease: Charles Laval, Paul Gauguin, and Tuberculosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
C harles Laval (1861-1894) was a Parisian painter whose brief life ended in an untimely death from underlying tuberculosis.He was a colleague and contemporary of two other post-Impressionists: Vincent van Gogh (1853-1890) and Paul Gauguin .In part because of misattribution, Laval's work has receded into a historical footnote to the career of Gauguin, whose output far exceeded that of Laval.Gauguin, among the most renowned of the late 19th century European artists, was a pioneer of the Synthetist school of painting.This post-Impressionist movement encouraged artists to depict their emotions about the subject, beyond its outward appearance, with bold displays of color, relaxation of exactitude, and portrayal of form based on memory.Laval studied under realist painter Léon Bonnat at the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris.In the summer of 1886, he became acquainted with van Gogh and Gauguin at Pont-Aven, a growing artist colony in Brittany.In April 1887, Laval and Gauguin set sail for Panama, an adventure that was ostensibly pursued for employment at the invitation of Gauguin's brother-in-law, a Chilean with business interests in Panama.In June 1887, after several misadventures, Laval and Gauguin left Panama for Martinique, where they painted together before returning to France in November of the same year.The emergence of Laval's eccentric, flamboyant style coincided with Gauguin's.The astonishing similarity of their works from that period has led art historians to conclude that a few of Laval's paintings were incorrectly attributed to Gauguin, whose signature was added later to inflate market value.Femmes et Chevre dans le Village (Women and Goat in the Village), presented on the next page, was undertaken in Martinique and bears a Gauguin signature but has been attributed by some to 634
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 | 0.017 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.029 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".