Paradigme ou modèle : les héritiers de Van Gogh et les paradoxes de l’authenticité
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vincent van Gogh is still considered today as the exemplary figure of the modern artist. His works and his distinctive fate are still the object of a veneration to which a considerable market value is linked. This article examines the paradox originating from the status given to van Gogh of the “grand singulier” – the great singularity – a status which remains by definition impossible to emulate. The imitation of van Gogh's art would, of course, bring about a loss of originality. Moreover, the imitation of his life as an unwilling martyr of art could only be accomplished with a loss of authenticity. This explains why allusions to van Gogh by contemporary artists such as Robert Motherwell, Gina Pane and Christian Boltanski are reduced to borrowing the distant forms of reserve, of parodic reference and of reflexive distance.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.064 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".