MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029587325 · doi:10.7202/1069619ar

Law or Independence – What Does the Frame Stand For?

2020· article· fr· W3029587325 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vera Beyer

Bibliographic record

VenueRACAR Revue d art canadienne · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPortraitArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans sa conception classique, le cadre donne de la légitimité, de l’autorité et de la crédibilité à la vision du monde qui y est représentée ; il donne du pouvoir à la représentation. Cette situation change au début de la modernité. Plutôt que de légitimer l’image, le cadre déclare alors l’indépendance de l’image vis-à-vis du regardeur. La relation entre image et spectateur, pour qui le cadre joue son rôle de représentation, passe de la crédibilité au détachement. Le portrait de royauté, exemplaire de l’image qui fait autorité, illustre bien ce changement, notamment dans les tableaux de Vélázquez et Goya.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.061
Scholarly communication0.0110.025
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRACAR Revue d art canadienneSame topicHistorical and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207