MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124008997 · doi:10.4000/genesis.5728

Focus. Le Laocoon en saint Sébastien

2020· article· fr· W3124008997 on OpenAlexaff
Éric Pagliano

Bibliographic record

VenueGenesis · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanitiesPaintingArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’enjeu de cet article est double. Il s’agit en premier lieu de présenter un cas de transformation d’une matrice exogène dans le domaine des arts figurés, en l’occurrence une peinture du Florentin Francesco Furini (1603-1646) qui, pour représenter un saint Sébastien, s’était servi de la figure de Laocoon issue du groupe sculpté éponyme découvert à Rome en 1506. Un ensemble de dessins montre ce processus de remaniement. En second lieu, il s’agit de montrer que cet emprunt répond à des recommandations prescrites par des théologiens et des théoriciens de l’art, auteurs de traités parus en Italie dans les années 1560-1580, suivies partiellement par le peintre.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.003

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.243
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
GenreOther

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 venueGenesisSame topicHistorical and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207