MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122813029 · doi:10.7202/1071545ar

L’atelier institué en portrait de l’artiste moderne dans la littérature du XIXe siècle

2020· article· en· W3122813029 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Véronique Rodriguez

Bibliographic record

VenueRACAR Revue d art canadienne · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsCollege Ahuntsic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStudioArtPortraitStoveVisual artsHumanitiesArt historyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyses the importance of the artist’s studio in some nineteenth-century French novels. In these texts, the studio comprises many typical motifs, repeated from one novel to the next: the difficulty of its access, the particular quality of its lighting, and specific pieces of furniture – mirror, folding screen, stove and divan. Besides these descriptive aspects, the studio also contributes to secure the artist in his creative role. These invariables participate in the construction of the artist’s identity in setting out the different levels of his interactions – the relations to the self, to the other, and to the group – all of them subsumed in the sole motif of the stove, emblematic condenser of these multiple relationships. This analysis also reveals that, for these writers, the studio can also be instituted as the real portrait of the artist by evoking an aesthetic, as well as by staging the social conditions of its occupant. When the artist becomes an important protagonist in his “milieu,” the studio is not a mere “architectural container,” but the real psychological mirror of the hero. In order to explain the metonymic and metaphoric aspects of the studio, this study examines in more depth Jules and Edmond de Goncourt’s novel, Manette Salomon (1867), because of the particular status that the authors have given it.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.933

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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