Vaporization and/or Centralization: On the (Self-)Portraits of Manet and Degas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Admiration réciproque, rivalité, incompatibilité caractérielle font partie du rapport entre Edouard Manet (1832–1883) et Edgar Degas (1834–1917). Puisque les sources écrites sont avares de renseignements à ce propos, il faudra interroger les oeuvres des deux maîtres elles-mêmes pour trouver les raisons de cette incompatibilité. On aura alors la chance de cerner deux positions inconciliables quant à l’art en général et l’art moderne en particulier. Les pages qui suivent se proposent de le faire, en partant de l’analyse des autoportraits des deux peintres et des rares portraits de l’un faits par l’autre. Une attention spéciale est vouée au tableau intitulé M. et Mme Manet, réalisé par Degas vers 1865 et découpé par Manet peu après l’avoir reçu comme cadeau de la part de son confrère.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".